1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the entries in Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 3, Gap evidence 4, Gap evidence 5, Eul evidence 6, and Eul evidence 1, and there is no counter-proof.

On December 27, 2016, the Plaintiff and Nonparty D entered into a comprehensive business transfer agreement (hereinafter “instant transfer/acquisition agreement”) with the Defendant Company on the following terms and conditions:

1) Article 1 of the Agreement refers to the shopping mall operated by the Defendant Company (hereinafter “instant shopping mall”).

The purpose of Article 6(6) of the Value-Added Tax Act is to acquire all rights and obligations with respect to the business of the Plaintiff and Nonparty D comprehensively, thereby transferring the business under Article 6(6) of the Value-Added Tax Act. (2) The Plaintiff and Nonparty D, on December 27, 2016, will take over the total amount of assets and total amount of liabilities on the current Defendant Company’s account books.

3) The value of transfer or acquisition under Article 4 shall be the balance calculated by subtracting the total liabilities from the total assets under Article 3. Assets and liabilities may be revised and assessed after confirmation by Defendant Company, Plaintiff, and Nonparty D, if there are matters to be corrected in accordance with the corporate accounting standards. 4) The amount of transfer or acquisition shall be paid as calculated in accordance with Article

(1) Transfer price: 25,00,000 won.

B. On December 27, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 5,000,000 to Defendant C the down payment of the instant transfer contract, and on February 6, 2017, paid KRW 4,700,000 to Defendant C.

C. Nonparty D is the Defendant Company on September 1, 2017.