1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (such as law, precedents, interpretation and application of legal principles, recognition of facts and facts requiring proof, determination of issues, etc.) is sufficiently reasonable as a result of determining issues in accordance with the appellate court’s methods and principles, laws, precedents, legal principles and rules of evidence based on the litigation materials and the pleading materials submitted to the appellate court citing the judgment

The reasoning for this Court concerning this case is as stated in the part of the judgment of the first instance except for a decision on additional matters alleged by the Plaintiff as the reason for appeal, as set forth in paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) below. Thus, this Court cited this case as it is included in summary pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. (a) No. 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance, "No. 10, 13 of A" was added to "No. 4, 10, 13 of A" and "No. 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance.

(b) No. 7 of the judgment of the first instance court, No. 19 of the Act on the Resolution Procedures for the Large Committee shall be applied to “the Resolution Procedures for the Board of Representatives”.

(c) On the 8th judgment of the first instance court, Article 19 of the instant selection criteria “Article 14(1) and (2) of the instant selection criteria” was applied.

(d) Part 9 of the judgment of the court of first instance is subject to Paragraph 3 of Article 22 of the Defendant’s Articles of Incorporation, “Article 22(3).”

3. Additional determination on the grounds for appeal

A. As to the assertion of substantial illegality in the instant resolution, the summary of the claim is as follows: (a) L/N’s employees and superior officers of the H business entity’s external employees of the H business entity, provided money and valuables to the Plaintiff, and (b) M/N had already been subject to criminal punishment. In addition, the H business entity provided money and valuables to its members and entertainment (at least 30 employees of the H business entity that contacted with its members, and 76 members who received entertainment) and operated an individual public relations center at broad and broad times. Such violation of the H business entity’s provision of money and valuables and entertainment as well as the provision of individual public relations regulations on prohibition of public relations was in itself significant errors; and (c) the H business entity was actually selected as a Si project entity with the table of the 300