1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added in the trial are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case is as follows. The court below added the judgment on the conjunctive claim. The defendants suffered damages equivalent to KRW 364,083,698 due to the defendants' deception, and the plaintiff's previous assertion that the defendant Eul lent KRW 15,00,000 to the defendant E is insufficient to recognize the facts of the plaintiff's previous assertion, or the plaintiff's rejection of the entries in the evidence Nos. 17-1, 2, and 19 are the same as the part corresponding to the reasons of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 420 of the

【Judgment on Preliminary Claim】 The Plaintiff entered into the instant contract with the Defendants: (a) at the time of entering into the instant contract; (b) at the time of entering into the instant contract, the Plaintiff may obtain a loan equivalent to KRW 10 billion in the name of the Defendants; and (c) by mistake that there is no obligation of the said company; and (d) the instant contract constitutes an expression of intent due to mistake; and (e) the Plaintiff’s duplicate of the preparatory document dated March 3, 2014, which included the intent to revoke the declaration of intent, was delivered to the Defendants; (b) the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to return the amount of 364,083,698 won to the Plaintiff; and (b) the Defendants submitted all necessary matters for the manufacturing method and process related to the instant patent right to the Plaintiff through the instant contract to the Plaintiff; and (b) the Defendants expressed their intent to rescind the instant contract with the intent to faithfully explain the manufacturing method and manufacturing process of the manufacturing machinery at the time of the Plaintiff’s request and expressed its intent to do not perform the instant contract.