1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The court's explanation concerning this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for dismissal or addition and deletion as mentioned below 2. Thus, this case is quoted by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Article 23 of the Defendant’s Rewards and Disciplinary Regulations shall be added to the fourth upper part of the judgment of the court of first instance that is dismissed or added and deleted as follows:

The disciplinary action of Article 23 (Prescription) shall not be taken five years after the date on which the cause of the disciplinary action occurred. The first instance court's 6th to 9th 8th 1st 3th am the following.

(A) As to the ground for disciplinary action No. 3, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff lent money to E, but this did not affect the business of lending money to himself/herself. If Article 15 of the Defendant’s reward and disciplinary action regulations provides for the grounds for disciplinary action to the lending of money to a customer who has no business relations, it is null and void as it is not justifiable. Moreover, if the Defendant’s reward and disciplinary action regulations provide for the grounds for disciplinary action against the transaction with the customer who has no business relations, it is null and void as it is not justifiable. In addition, the part on the money transaction with E as of September 17, 201 and the period of prescription for five years has elapsed since the lapse of five years. (1) According to the overall purport of each of the statements and arguments and evidence No. 21, No. 4, 6, 7, and 8, the Plaintiff may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff lent to E each of the facts.

The above monetary transactions constitute grounds for disciplinary action under Article 15 subparag. 8 of the Defendant’s reward and disciplinary action regulations, as acts of lending and lending money between the Defendant’s business partner E, and the need to prevent in advance the possibility that disputes may arise due to the Defendant’s monetary transactions between the Defendant’s employee and his/her business partner and the damage to the fairness of his/her business transaction. Considering that Article 15 subparag. 8 of the Defendant’s reward and disciplinary action regulations that prescribe the act of lending and lending money

(2) Meanwhile, according to the above evidence, the following evidence is examined.