The judgment of the first instance court is modified as follows. A.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 as well as to the plaintiff on December 5, 2016.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal as set forth in the following two, thereby citing it as is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The actual substance of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be as follows: (a) Forms 7 through 17, on the 5th page of the judgment.

“The Defendant entered into a share transfer contract with G, which includes a provision that “The Defendant shall not have any significant impact on the conclusion of the transaction, such as the consent or approval of a third party required to perform the obligation under the instant share transfer contract,” and reflected the agreement prepared separately by G upon obtaining the Plaintiff’s approval for the said share transfer. As such, the Plaintiff could be aware or fully aware of the said share transfer. ② The representative director of G was in a relationship with the Plaintiff’s husband L who is the actual party to the instant share transfer contract, and E decided that it is unnecessary to obtain a written consent for the transfer of shares separately from the Plaintiff and did not obtain a separate written consent. ③ The Defendant did not raise any special objection against the Defendant’s transfer of shares, and the Plaintiff did not request the Defendant to participate in the process of signing the instant contract, and did not notify the Defendant of the terms and conditions of the instant underwriting contract or request the Plaintiff to cancel the obligation before signing the contract.