1. Of the part concerning the counterclaim of the judgment of the court of first instance, the amount equivalent to the amount ordered to be paid under paragraph (2) below.

1. The reasons why this Court shall state this part of the basic facts are excluded from the following parts, and the reasons why this Court excludes the following parts, are the same as the statement from third to fourth to nine from among the reasons of the judgment of the first instance. As such, it refers to the summary under the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The defendant C in the first instance court Co-Defendant C (hereinafter referred to as the "C") shall be subject to the first instance court's co-defendant C (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant C"), and all of the defendants C shall be subject to the second instance judgment as "C".

The Ministry of Education, Science and Technology No. 17-19 (the part of the grounds for recognition of basic facts) shall be followed as follows.

[Ground for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 12, Eul evidence 3 through 8 (including each number, hereinafter the same shall apply)

(2) Each entry and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The reasons why the court in this part of the judgment on the claim for principal action is to be stated are as follows, except for the parts to be dried or added as follows, Section 4 Item 2 of the judgment of the first instance.

3. The margin between them shall not be included in calculating the number of conduct.

Since the entry is the same as that from No. 11 to No. 2, it shall be cited as it is, as it is, including a summary under the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

The first class No. 7, first class 4, and second class “Defendant C” shall be applied to all “C”.

The number 6-9 (3.2) of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries) Nos. 8, 6-9 (3.2) of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries is as follows. 2. On the other hand, C is as follows: (a) in-house director and executive director of the Defendant Company, who has overall control over business activities, such as sales of pipes, etc. of the Defendant Company; (b) concluded the instant sales contract on behalf of the Defendant Company on behalf of the Plaintiff and received KRW 791,239,025 from the Plaintiff during the period from January 1, 2015 to July 31, 2015; (c) did not supply pipes to the Plaintiff upon receipt of pipes only; (d) was convicted of the said act as a crime of fraud; and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

. The above.