1. After remand, the plaintiff's claim that the court changed in exchange is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff’s total costs of litigation.

1. Scope of the judgment of this court;

A. In the first instance trial, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the payment of KRW 37,145,00 in total and delay damages equivalent to the sales proceeds sold by stealing the retirement expenses owned by the Plaintiff from September 10, 2014 to October 30 of the same year, and the judgment of the first instance court to fully accept the Plaintiff’s claim from the Plaintiff on November 24, 2016.

B. The Defendant appealed against this. In the first instance court prior to the remanding, the Plaintiff filed an incidental appeal by adding the Defendant’s CCTV theft and the Plaintiff’s claim for property damage amounting to KRW 1,350,000 due to retirement from September 1, 2016.

The judgment of the court of first instance prior to the remand accepted part of the defendant's appeal, and changed the judgment of the court of first instance to the purport of admitting part of the plaintiff's appeal and 4, 1,350,000 won for damages and damages for delay.

C. The Defendant filed an appeal against the judgment before remanding the case, and the Supreme Court reversed the part against the Defendant in the judgment before remanding the case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 4) and remanded the case.

Accordingly, the remaining parts of the judgment before remanding the case (excluding the part that was reversed and remanded) (excluding the part that was ruled against the plaintiff, 1, 2, and 3) were determined and excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court, and the scope of the judgment after remanding the case is limited to the part against the above defendant. However, since the plaintiff changed the cause of the appeal to the defendant's CCTV theft and intangible damages claim due to the retirement theft on September 1, 2016 in the trial after remanding the case, it is ultimately subject to the judgment of this court.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion is owned by the CCTV body and the plaintiff, which are equivalent to KRW 1,00,000 established by the defendant in the office of the plaintiff.