1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. The plaintiffs asserted that the non-party E company (hereinafter "non-party E company") would have 17 industrial trainees, including the plaintiffs, who are Chinese nationals, employed in the Republic of Korea as industrial trainees, and received 170,000 China from the plaintiffs. The above 17 industrial trainees were not employed in the Republic of Korea.

Meanwhile, Defendant D also guaranteed entry into the Republic of Korea to the Plaintiffs, and prepared a loan certificate stating that, on December 13, 2012, the Plaintiffs should pay 12 million won to the Plaintiffs by December 31, 2012, who were employed as the Plaintiffs’ industrial trainees.

On the other hand, Defendant C is the representative director of the non-party company, and the facts are that the plaintiffs did not have the intent or ability to get employed in the Republic of Korea as industrial trainees, thereby deceiving 170,000 in China, and the defendant D also participated therein.

Therefore, Defendant C is obligated to pay 170,000,000 won to the plaintiffs as damages for illegal acts, and Defendant D shall pay 12,000,000 won to China.

2. In full view of the purport of the entire arguments as to the assertion against Defendant C, the following facts are acknowledged: (a) the 17-party company, including the plaintiffs, paid the 17-party company a total sum of 170,000 U.S. per capita to enter the Republic of Korea as industrial trainee; (b) however, the above 17-party did not enter the Republic of Korea as industrial trainee; and (c) the fact that Defendant C was the representative director of the non-party company.

However, the above circumstance alone is insufficient to recognize that the fact that the non-party company was involved in the defraudation of 170,000 UN as a security deposit even though it did not have the intent or ability to have the plaintiffs employed as industrial trainees due to the false statement by Defendant C, etc.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' assertion cannot be accepted.

Next, Defendant D.