1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing the reasoning of the judgment citing this case is that the court of first instance admitting the Plaintiff’s assertion as additional evidence submitted by this court excluding the statement of evidence Nos. 13 through 18, which is insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion, and citing this as it is based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding adding

2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiff’s grounds of appeal were concluded by the Defendants’ coercion of May 11, 2015, which served as the grounds for receiving KRW 300 million from the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant agreement”) by the Plaintiff’s association president P and Defendant B, a managing director, and thus, the Plaintiff’s submission of legal brief was revoked by the delivery of legal brief as of November 28, 2017.

Therefore, without any legal cause, the Defendants received KRW 300 million from the Plaintiff and make unjust enrichment.

Therefore, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to return the above unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 300 million and delay damages to the plaintiff.

B. In light of the overall purport of the pleadings No. 9 and No. 12 and 25, it can be acknowledged that: (a) on May 11, 2015, F will pay to Defendant C KRW 1.05 billion; (b) the Plaintiff entered into the instant agreement with the effect that the Plaintiff will guarantee F’s above obligation; (c) on May 27, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the same party on May 11, 2015, stating that “the attachment agreement (referring to the instant agreement) entered into between C and F” on May 11, 2015, and “the revocation of the attachment agreement (referring to the agreement) entered into between C and F, without cancelling New Trera, becomes void by the agreement between the parties pursuant to the agreement that was already received on May 27, 2015, and thus, Defendant C may be deemed as the final cause for the Plaintiff’s payment of KRW 300,000,000.

Therefore, this case is based on which the Defendants received KRW 300 million from the Plaintiff.