1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is that Gap's statements and images as Gap's evidence Nos. 14 and 15 are insufficient for the plaintiff's assertion, and that the court's explanation of this case is about No. 3 among the grounds of the judgment of the first instance

(b)Paragraphs (3) of this paragraph shall be amended as follows 2.3, as described in paragraph 3.

(b)(8) :

The plaintiff added the same content as the paragraph, and as regards the argument that the plaintiff added in the trial, the following 3-B.

This is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition of judgment like Paragraph (1), and such judgment is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The Plaintiff asserts that, while managing the instant account around June 2013, B had already agreed to compensate the Plaintiff for losses, and that the Plaintiff had agreed to compensate the Plaintiff for losses even around the end of 2014 and around June 2015, there is no evidence to acknowledge the agreement.

On the other hand, B promises 130,000,000 won as the appraised amount until December 29, 2016 and receives 50% of the difference as the performance compensation in cases where benefits occur.

“Preparation and delivery of a written statement to the Plaintiff. B purchased 580 shares of G Co., Ltd. by September 23, 2015, and sold all other shares and thereafter did not trade other shares, and B did not trade other shares after the preparation of the said written statement, and considering the situation before and after the continued holding of shares of G Co., Ltd., the said written statement was prepared at the Plaintiff’s request to enforce liability for investment losses, and it does not appear that B prepared to stop the Plaintiff’s investment.

In addition, the agreement under the above clause is null and void in violation of Article 55 of the Capital Markets Act.

3. The addition;

(a) 3;

B. In light of the Plaintiff’s investment period, investment amount, investment tendency, etc., the Plaintiff is at the time of engaging in a stock transaction to B around June 2013.