1. Of the judgment of the first instance, part of the judgment against Defendant B and K companies is modified as follows:

The defendant KK company is the first instance court.

1. Scope of adjudication of this court;

A. The following facts are clear on the records.

(1) On January 5, 2017, the Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendants and E, F, G, I, and J.

The causes of the claim shall be as follows:

(A) Main cause of claim: (a) Preliminary cause of claim based on Articles 750 and 760 of the Civil Act for joint tort; (b) Preliminary cause of claim against Defendant B: Liability for damages based on Article 399(1) of the Commercial Act for damages based on Article 401-2(1) and Article 399(1) of the Commercial Act; and (c) the Plaintiff is liable for return of unjust enrichment based on Article 741 of the Civil Act for the sake of joint tort; and (d) the Plaintiff voluntarily requested a return of unjust enrichment for the sake of KRW 200,000,000 deposited in the account opened in the name of the Defendant among the subscription price for capital gains withdrawn on March 31, 201.

3) On January 9, 2018, the court of the first instance on the responsibility to return unjust enrichment based on Article 741 of the Civil Act (2) against the remaining Defendants: (a) partially of the conjunctive claims against E, Defendant B, and K and the conjunctive claims against Defendant H are accepted, and (b) the remainder of the conjunctive claims against E, F, G, I, J, and Defendants, E, Defendant B, and K (the part seeking compensation amounting to KRW 119,477,706, or unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 119,47,706, which Defendant K received as the entire obligee of Defendant H).

From the following point of view, “19,477,706 Claims”

(C) The first instance court rendered a judgment dismissing both the conjunctive claim against the Defendant B, G, I, J, Defendant C, D, and L. However, the lower court did not render a separate judgment on the ground that the claim for the return of unjust enrichment of KRW 200,000,000 among the conjunctive claim against the Defendant B was fully granted the claim for the return of unjust enrichment of KRW 200,00,000,000, which is the selective relation. (3) The Plaintiff appealed against the Defendant C, D, and L among the judgment of the first instance, and the Defendant B, H, and K is dissatisfied with the part against each of the conjunctive claim against the Defendant B, H, and K in the first instance judgment.