1. The judgment of the first instance court, including the claims added and expanded in the trial before remand, shall be modified as follows.

1. Scope of the judgment of this court;

A. In the first instance court, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for restitution of unjust enrichment on the grounds of invalidation of the contract, and the conjunctive claim for the agreed amount based on the agreement on the apportionment of losses. The first instance court dismissed the primary claim and accepted part of the conjunctive claim by recognizing the Defendant’s obligation to share losses.

B. The Defendant filed an appeal against this, and the Plaintiff extended the purport of the claim before remanding the case, and added the second preliminary claim to it.

The court of first instance, which dismissed the plaintiff's primary claim, maintains the judgment of the court of first instance, and pursuant to the first preliminary claim, it cannot be deemed that there was an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant on the loss apportionment at the time of entering into the agreement of this case, but thereafter, accepted the plaintiff's preliminary claim on the ground that

Recognizing that the Defendant’s amount of loss to be paid is USD 164,543.04, and that the Plaintiff and the Defendant would pay KRW 166,145,689 as calculated by applying the trading standard rate to USD 4, 2014 when the transaction was terminated between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

With regard to the Defendant’s assertion, the trial prior to remand rejected all the allegations that ① the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant is not a party to the instant agreement, ② the defense of invalidity of the agreement on loss apportionment, ③ the F Account’s investment in R is not an agreement on loss apportionment, ④ the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff incurred losses from voluntary settlement of each of the instant accounts, ⑤ the Plaintiff’s strong pressure that set off the Defendant’s claim for damages equivalent to KRW 300 million paid to P.

C. As to this, the Plaintiff and the Defendant appealed against each of the judgment of the lower court prior to remand, and the Supreme Court shall pay the Defendant the amount converted into the exchange rate at that time, based on the time the judgment prior to remand became final and conclusive due to the conclusion of transaction.