1. Each appeal against the Defendants by the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Co-Litigation Intervenor, and Defendant D’s Plaintiff and Plaintiff.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) it is identical to the ground for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the modification or supplement of some of the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance as set forth in paragraph (2) and the addition of the judgment as to the party’s assertion in the trial; and (b) thus, it is cited

2. Parts of change and supplement;

A. [1. D.) On the other hand, the Seoul Southern District Court Order 2015Kadan203145 Decided November 12, 2015 by the Intervenor’s motion, issued a non-disposition on the patent right of this case against Defendant D on November 6, 2017. Defendant D completed the procedure for transferring the title of the patent of this case to H on November 6, 2017. Defendant D completed the procedure for having no dispute over the grounds for recognition. Defendant A did not have any dispute over the grounds for recognition, and 1 through 10, 12 through 15, 20, 21, 26, 30, 31, 36, 69 through 71, 73 through 77, 79, 79, 79, 80, 1, 79, 56, 58, 97, and part of witness testimony in the entire pleadings.

(d) add paragraphs (2) and (3) to the part below (section 4 of the first instance judgment) (section 3), as follows, and modify (based on recognition) parts.

B. [2.(b)(A) The Plaintiff’s defense that the Plaintiff was not a de facto shareholder, and thus failed to meet the requirements for a representative lawsuit, is amended as follows.

2) Whether Defendant C has nominal trust of the Intervenor’s shares to Defendant C (1) is presumed to be a shareholder of the company’s shareholder registry, and the company bears the burden of proving the denial of the shareholder’s rights in order to reverse this.

In order to recognize that a third party, who is not a shareholder on the register of shareholders, is not only a shareholder on the register of shareholders but also a shareholder on the register of shareholders, the fact that the third party, who is not a shareholder on the register of shareholders, has paid the subscription price for shares is insufficient.