1. The part of the judgment of the first instance against the Defendants shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above revocation part and the plaintiff's claim.

1. The plaintiff, within the scope of the judgment of this court, filed a claim for damages (the purport that the defendant deceivings the defendant and let the plaintiff make an investment of KRW 164,496,00,00, which is a total of KRW 20,300,00,000, in terms of loan without intent or ability to repay) primarily against the defendants, for preliminary settlement of accounts related to the business (inasmuch as the agreement was concluded with the defendant, the defendants should share the amount of losses of KRW 49,258,00 in accordance with the ratio of profit distribution), and for loans (the purport that the defendants shall share the amount of KRW 10,30,00,000 and KRW 10,000,000,

The first instance court actually accepted the loan claim among the conjunctive claims (excluding only a part of delay damages), and only the Defendants appealed. The scope of the first instance court's judgment is limited to the above 20,300,000 won damages and the loan claim (the claim for damages is included in the scope of judgment because the actual nature is selective consolidation) and the loan claim extended in the trial.

2. Basic facts

A. On December 2014, the Plaintiff proposed a business to develop, manufacture, and sell the heating container “D” (hereinafter “instant product”) from the Defendants (hereinafter “instant business”) (hereinafter “instant product”). Around December 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendants agreed to undertake the instant business along with the Defendants.

B. The Plaintiff bears all expenses for the instant project, including the production of gold-type and various facilities, and the Defendants provided the manufacturing technology of the instant product.

On November 2014, the Defendants filed an application for a patent regarding the technology related to the manufacturing of the instant product (hereinafter “instant patent”) at the expense of the Defendants, and registered E Defendants and F as the patentee of the instant patent.

C. On January 1, 2015, upon the request of the Defendants, the Plaintiff paid each of the Defendants KRW 5 million to Defendant B, KRW 5.3 million to Defendant B on February 3, 2015, KRW 5.5 million to Defendant C, and KRW 1.5 million to Defendant C on March 6, 2015.

The patent of this case is E.