1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and Plaintiff I as to the revoked part.

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the facts are as follows, in addition to the reasons why the part of the reasons for the 5th to 9th to 11th to 7th of the judgment of the court of first instance ("the part concerning the facts of recognition of 2." among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance) is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it shall be accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The part of the "Defendant U, who is the president" in the 8th sentence of the first instance court shall be referred to as "U, who is the president".

B. Article 18-19 of the judgment of the court of first instance provides that “The suspicion of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement)” shall be construed as “the suspicion of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement).”

C. The part of the first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance judgment Nos. 10 to 3-4, “(118) was pronounced partially guilty, and the appellate court is proceeding in the present Seoul High Court (2013No1518).”

The 10th to 11th of the decision of the first instance shall be in accordance with the following subparagraphs.

2) As to the judgment of the first instance court in the above criminal case, Defendant K, L and prosecutor appealed respectively. On January 22, 2015, the Seoul High Court (2013No1518) found Defendant K and L guilty at the first instance court (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoul High Court”) found Defendant K and L guilty on January 22, 2015, accepted each audit report in relation to the inclusion of financial advisory fees, and sentenced Defendant K and L to the acquittal on the above part, and rejected the remaining appeal and the prosecutor’s appeal.

After that, the above appellate judgment on Defendant K and L became final and conclusive on August 19, 2015 by the Supreme Court.

(2015Do2201)

(e) Notice No. 13, 27, and 35 of the 6th sentence of the first instance judgment (each of the judgments) of the Court of First Instance 13, 35 of the A.