1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant D ordering payment in excess of the following amounts shall be cancelled:

1. Basic facts

A. The telephone financial fraud group presumed to be a hub in China has the role of withdrawing money from many unspecified victims by misrepresenting their government agencies, financial institutions, etc., leading them to withdrawal, remittance, and solicitation of passbooks, withdrawing money deposited in the large passbook according to the instructions of the total liability, and delivering the withdrawal money deposited in the large passbook to the members of the telephone financial fraud group, and the solicitation and delivery of passbooks used for committing the crime, and operating in the form of an occupation organization in preparation for arrest.

B. On December 2012, the Defendants, along with the proposal of the Telecommunications Financial Fraud Group E (one Chief of the F Office) which is the organization of the Telecommunications Financial Fraud Group, deposited the amount of damage by using the passbook, cash card, security card, etc. from the members of the aforementioned Telecommunications Financial Fraud Group, and charged the head of the F Office with the role of transmitting the amount to the said Chief of the F Office.

C. According to the division of the above role, on January 21, 2013, the members in charge of the above telephone financial fraud group’s name entered the Plaintiff’s financial information into the Internet website which is the most part of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office’ Office’ homepage, and then transferred KRW 62,710,000 from the Plaintiff’s financial account to 11 accounts, such as the Agricultural Bank’s account in the name of Nonparty H, in the future, via the above financial information, by posting a phone to the Plaintiff at around 10:0,00.

(hereinafter “instant tort”). D.

The Defendants withdrawn KRW 5,990,000, which was transferred to the Agricultural Cooperative under H’s name, out of KRW 62,710,000, from the Plaintiff’s above damage amount to the said F Office, and delivered the said amount to the F Office and received compensation from the F Office.

(e).