1. At the request of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) A, which was added at the trial, the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. Basic facts

A. The parties’ status 1) The Plaintiff’s new financial investment company (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s new financial investment”).

(1) The Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (hereinafter “Capital Markets Act”) provides for the purpose of investment trading business, investment brokerage business, etc.

(2) The Defendant is the deceased D(Death on July 20, 2012). The Plaintiff is a financial investment business entity under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act and is an employee of the Plaintiff’s new financial investment branch under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act.

3) From April 2010 to April 2010, Plaintiff A opened an account in the separate sheet in the name of Defendant and Defendant D (hereinafter “instant account”).

B) The Defendant’s property loss was designated as a manager. B. From September 2010 to January 2015, through the instant account, the transaction of financial instruments, such as stocks and ES (stock linked securities) was conducted between September 2010 and January 2015, and as a result, the Defendant suffered loss of property. 【Ground for Recognition” was without dispute, Party A’s evidence Nos. 3, and Party B’s evidence Nos. 1, 5, and 10 (including, if any, numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply).

each entry, the purport of the whole pleading

2. Of the plaintiffs' principal claim as to the defendant's counterclaim, it is merely a claim seeking confirmation that the defendant does not have any obligation as asserted in the counterclaim. Thus, it is not judged separately.

A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion 1) while managing the instant account, Plaintiff A, without entering into a discretionary investment contract with the Defendant, led to the management of the instant account by leading the instant account, such as investing in the stocks and the ES (stock Linked Securities) without the Defendant’s approval. In the course of illegal discretionary investment trading conducted by Plaintiff A, as seen above, not only incurred a loss in the instant account, but also incurred an excessive share trading fee through excessive trading, Plaintiff A attempted to suspend investment.

However, the plaintiff A is out of the investment loss to the defendant.