1. Each appeal filed by the Plaintiff and Defendant B is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff and Defendant C Co., Ltd.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case is as follows: (a) if the Plaintiff’s obligation to cooperate is deemed only to be “the Plaintiff’s obligation,” the content of the obligation should be invalidated. However, at the time of the instant amendment agreement, the Plaintiff was in most of the reasons or circumstances acceptable by the foregoing evidence; (b) the Defendant, before the instant amendment agreement was reached, shall have only 1 to 2 members of the remaining site contract, should have been concluded; and (c) the instant amendment agreement considerably reduced service cost and changed the method of payment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 860,200,000,000 won for service costs under the instant service agreement; (d) it appears that the Plaintiff’s alteration of the duty to cooperate with the Plaintiff; and (e) it is difficult to find that the Plaintiff’s alteration of the duty to cooperate with the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s content would not be reasonable in light of the following facts: (e.g., the Plaintiff’s alteration of the duty to cooperate with the Plaintiff’s standard form and content.

2. If so, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate.