1. Of the part against the Defendants in the judgment of the first instance, the lower court against the Defendants exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below.

1. The reasoning for this part of this Court’s reasoning is that the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance is identical to that of the judgment, except for those written by the court as follows. Thus, this part of the reasoning is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

Part 4, Section 10 "(2) of this Agreement" has been amended to "(1) in accordance with this Agreement".

Part 5-7 of the title 8-7, “A lawsuit against G is pending on May 19, 2016 (2016 Gohap528620)” was filed with the Seoul Central District Court on May 19, 2016 and rendered a favorable judgment on November 29, 2017 (2016 Gohap528620), and the G appealed appealed to the Seoul High Court that is currently pending in the lawsuit (2018Na201474).

Part 8 of "Nos. 18, 21, 22" in Part 9 shall be written with "each entry of Nos. 18, 21, 22, 26".

2. Determination as to claims against the Defendants

A. 1) In a case where the authenticity of a disposition document is recognized, the court shall, in principle, recognize the existence and content of a declaration of intent as stated in the relevant disposition document, unless there is any clear and acceptable proof that the content of the statement is denied. In a case where there is any difference in the interpretation of a contract between the parties, and the interpretation of the intent of the parties expressed in the disposition document is at issue, it shall be reasonably interpreted in accordance with logical and empirical rules, by comprehensively taking into account the content of the text, the motive and background of the agreement, the purpose to be achieved by the agreement, the parties’ genuine intent, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Da6065, May 27, 2005).