1. The judgment of the first instance court, including the Plaintiff’s claim extended by this court, is modified as follows.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the addition or dismissal as stated in paragraph (2). Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(1) Each of the grounds for appeal regarding the remaining parts, with the exception of the following parts, is not significantly different from the allegations in the first instance court, and the facts established and determined in the first instance court are justifiable in light of the comprehensive view of the evidence and materials submitted in addition to this court). 2. On the 4th page 16th of the first instance court, the following shall be added to the parts added or added:

Meanwhile, Articles 396, 448, and 466(1) of the Commercial Act, which provide the basis for the claim for perusal and copy of accounting books, does not explicitly stipulate that the permitted period of perusal and copy may be restricted. Therefore, if the requirements for the claim for perusal and copy of accounting books, etc. under the above provision are satisfied, the court shall order the Defendant to inspect and copy the accounting books, etc. without limit of the permitted period within the scope requested by the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da50367, Nov. 28, 2013). Therefore, there is no special circumstance to restrict such request.

However, although the plaintiff is seeking the performance of inspection and copy from the day following the delivery of the original copy of the judgment of this case, the judgment without provisional execution, separate from the defendant's obligation to perform, has no executory power, so it cannot be accepted, and as long as an executory power takes place due to the confirmation of the judgment, it does not have any reason to separately specify the timing of the performance obligation in the text,

6 pages 5 to 13 of the judgment of the first instance (C. part of the judgment on the plaintiff's indirect compulsory performance) shall be followed as follows.

C. In the instant case regarding the Plaintiff’s claim for indirect compulsory performance, the health department and the Defendant ordered the court to allow the perusal and copying of accounting books, etc.