1.The judgment of the first instance court, including a claim modified in the trial, shall be modified as follows:

The defendant is the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is a stock company with the objective of investment brokerage business, etc., and E was working for a single bank, and around December 2002, when the Defendant left office, from around December 2002, the Defendant served as the head of the FP (PP Banking Team) team established by the Defendant. From November 2005 to May 2009, the Defendant worked as the head of the F branch office.

The plaintiffs are married and are investors who have deposited investments in the defendant upon the defendant's employee E's recommendation for investment.

B. At around 2005, the Plaintiffs entered into an agreement with E to guarantee certain profits, such as bank term deposits, by acquiring and operating an investment from the Plaintiffs, after opening a securities consignment management account with the Defendant.

(hereinafter “each of the instant agreements”. Although the Defendant asserts that there is no objective evidence to acknowledge a profit security agreement, according to the entries in subparagraph 3, the testimony of witness E of the first instance trial, and the fact that 6-7% of the annual amount of profit security agreement has been paid during the investment period, as seen thereafter, the fact of the E’s profit security agreement is recognized).

E received a certain amount of money from the Plaintiffs in accordance with the instant agreement, and managed the investment money by means of realizing the beneficiary certificates at the maturity following joining the fund, or taking over the beneficiary certificates of the fund to which another person has joined. From 2005 to 2007, E paid 6.0% per annum of the investment amount, and 7.0% per annum of the investment amount from 2007 to 2009.

From June 22, 2005 to March 22, 2012, Plaintiff A invested in 25 items and Plaintiff B invested in 9 items, as shown in attached Table 1, except each of the funds of this case, as seen in the latter from June 22, 2012.

E invested in multiple private equity funds, etc. under the names of the plaintiffs, but did not notify the plaintiffs of individual products, and the plaintiffs did not raise any objection.

As above.