1. All appeals filed by Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) A, Plaintiff B, and Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be individually counted.

1. The reasons for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as follows: “No evidence exists to acknowledge the fact that the Plaintiff had actually earned more income than the reported income” in Articles 4, 2, and 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da67602, 6719, Jul. 9, 2009). The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone, other than adding “The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff had actually earned more income than the reported income, and there is no other clear evidence to acknowledge this.” The second sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da67602, 6719, Jul. 9, 2009) shall be respected unless the method of appraisal, etc. is against the rule of experience or unreasonable (see, e., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da67619, Apr. 1, 2002).

2. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendant are justified within the scope of the above recognition, and each of the remaining claims is dismissed as it is without merit. The defendant's counterclaim against the plaintiff A is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiffs and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.