1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part concerning Plaintiff G, H, Q, and R is modified as follows. A.

The defendant is against the plaintiff 1 G.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation as to this part of the premise facts is as stated in the judgment of the first instance, i.e., “the basic facts” of “the judgment of the court of first instance,” and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

10 To revise the last 10th “rest” to “property”.

B. From October 19, 2015 to “C.” of the 12th three parallels, the market price of the issued and outstanding shares of the KABA by around June 28, 2016 is set at KRW 3,160 as follows.

C. On March 29, 2016, X sold the stocks issued by the Jinjin Group, which X had been holding by around March 29, 2016, and performed additional repayment on April 8, 2016, following the occurrence of contingent profits.

A person shall be appointed.

(d) revise the 13th 9 parallel “34 Certificate” to “34,45,53 Certificate”;

2. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the plaintiffs' arguments are as stated in the part concerning "2. The plaintiffs' claims" in the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Judgment as to the primary cause of claim

A. The reasoning for the court to explain this part of the claim concerning the corporate bonds of Plaintiff G, L, and Q in this case is as stated in the judgment of the first instance, “3. A. The claim concerning the corporate bonds of Plaintiff G, L, and Q, 268,” and this part is identical to that of the judgment of the first instance, except for the modification to the corresponding part as follows. Therefore, this part is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

1) The defendant added the following to the right side of the 7th below the 16th page "." The defendant asserts to the purport that since the share price of the LACV has increased to KRW 3,160 on June 28, 2016, which is close to the date of the closure of the argument in this case, the amount recovered to the above plaintiffs' stocks into the equity swap shall be the amount calculated by multiplying the said plaintiffs' stocks into the equity swap by KRW 3,160.

However, the defendant's shares converted into investment is the case of V.