1. All appeals by the plaintiffs and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the instant case is as follows, and the judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion at this court is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition under paragraph (3) below, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be dried;

A. On June 16, 2017, 15 of the judgment of the court of first instance, “the same day” is deemed to be “F”; “P” in Chapter 6, “P” in Chapter 14; “F 7,” “W 15,” “W 18,” “W 19,” “No. 8,” “A 8,” and “No. 8,” in the 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 16th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 16th 16th 16th 16th 1, “F 174 billion won of Chinese art work,” “F 1.7 billion won of Chinese art work,” and the Defendant sold the total amount of KRW 1.8 billion of Chinese art work,” and the Defendant paid KRW 1.8 billion of Chinese art work,” as evidence.

B. Nos. 9 through 14 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be conducted as follows.

③ On September 10, 2012, the Defendant stated that “The Chinese works were sold in KRW 1 billion, and F was a museum in Korea,” the Defendant stated that “I sent some of the books necessary for the museum, parts of Korean works, and Japanese works to F as services, because I sold Chinese works in KRW 1 billion.”

As alleged by the Defendant, if the Defendant sells an actual amount of KRW 1 billion to F at the time of selling Chinese art works to F, and was unable to receive the price, the Defendant silented the fact of selling Korean art works while being asked by the investigative agency as above.