1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasons why the court of the first instance shall explain this case are as follows: (a) all of the “this court” of the first instance judgment (the second, third, and third, third, and third, subsequent to the first, subsequent to the second, subsequent to the first, subsequent to the third, subsequent to the third, subsequent to the second, subsequent to the second, subsequent to the second, subsequent to the second); and (b) the second and the first, subsequent to the third, including any number, except for the case where the third and subsequent numbers are indicated, shall be included; and (c) the subsequent decision of the first instance is the same as that of the first instance judgment, and thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. As examined in the above cited part of the judgment added, it is reasonable to view that the Defendants’ wage and retirement allowance claims of the Defendants were served as an employee in the company run by F, and it is insufficient to view that the Defendants were false or exaggeratedly appropriated. The Plaintiff’s assertion on the grounds for appeal that the Plaintiff’s wage and retirement allowance claims of the Defendants were insufficient to recognize or reverse the factual basis of the cited part on September 27, 2017, based on the written evidence Nos. 5-2 through 7, No. 6-2 through 6, and No. 7-2 through 5, and the evidence No. 7-2 or 7-5, as well as the testimony of the witness at the court of first instance on September 27, 2017 at the request of the Plaintiff is insufficient.

3. Conclusion, the first instance judgment is justifiable.

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.