1. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a legal entity that owns 30 taxi vehicles for business in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and is engaged in the business of transporting taxi passengers. The Defendant is a person who served as the representative director of the Plaintiff from March 31, 201 to October 17, 2012.

B. At the time of holding office as the representative director of the Plaintiff, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff on the claim for loans with Suwon District Court 2013Kahap15176 (hereinafter “relevant case”) by asserting that the Plaintiff did not receive any payment of money or expenses related to the operation of the Plaintiff Company by proxy.

C. On February 21, 2014, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant seeking damages. On March 28, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a complaint by asserting that the Defendant embezzled an amount equivalent to KRW 2.6 billion while working as the representative director of the Plaintiff (Seoul East East District Prosecutors’ Office 2014 punishment No. 12915), and on July 2014, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an additional complaint on the ground that the Plaintiff’s additional occupational embezzlement and related case constituted litigation fraud.

(Seoul Eastern District Prosecutors' Office 2014 punishment No. 31972). D.

Since then, each of the above criminal cases was issued a non-prosecution disposition (not guilty of a charge) on September 4, 2014 and September 18, 2014, and the petition for adjudication filed by the Plaintiff for objection was also dismissed on March 17, 2015 and February 26, 2015.

(Seoul High Court No. 2014 early 527, 2014 early 527, 2014 early 5556). [Grounds for recognition] Fact that there is no dispute, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 11 through 13 (including each number), Eul evidence No. 15-6, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) The plaintiff's primary claim is that the defendant embezzled the plaintiff's funds by the following methods while in office as the representative director of the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff is responsible for compensating the plaintiff for the amount equivalent to the amount of embezzlement, i.e., the damage suffered by the plaintiff. As such, the plaintiff is responsible for compensating the plaintiff for the amount equivalent to the amount of embezzlement. As part of the following claims, the amount equivalent to the claim is KRW 676,862,740: