1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this part of the facts of recognition is the same as that of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal as follows, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The term "Defendants" shall be changed to "Defendants and Co-Defendant C of the first instance trial."

(b) delete “not later than August 2014” in the third part of the judgment of the first instance.

C. Under the fifth fifth of the judgment of the first instance, the phrase “(US$ 20,833.33 each month)” means “($ 500,000 of the principal shall be repaid in 24 installments over 20,83.33 each month from February 24, 2015 to February 24, 2015, one year after the date of lending.”

The 8th judgment of the first instance court is that “The payment was made.” The payment was made and each of the above 400,000 shares was received.”

E. On August 25, 2014, the first instance court did not hold that “I did not 8 pages 8,” and around that time, the Plaintiff was aware of the suspension of the operation of the wood pellets factory by visiting D’s wood pellets factory.”

(f) 8 pages 8 of the first instance judgment shall add the following:

(g) On April 4, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a report under Article 18 of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act on the acquisition of 400,000 new shares of D by investing 400,000 p. D in D on April 4, 2014 ($ 121,080). On May 21, 2014, and June 11, 2014, the Plaintiff requested the supply of wood pellets to D on May 500 tons of the funds necessary for the new construction of a second factory to inform the Plaintiff of a plan for raising more than 1,00,000 new shares out of the funds necessary for the new construction of a second factory, and the Plaintiff did not comply with the above supply, but suspended the acquisition of 40,000 shares of the said new shares (Evidence evidence 7, 9, and 11-2, hereinafter referred to as “C co-defendant”).

) On July 9, 2014, the instant agreement between the shareholders on the ground of the Plaintiff’s nonperformance of the obligation to underwrite 400,000 new shares.