All appeals are dismissed.

Costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the Defendant’s ground of appeal

A. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 through 3, the lower court acknowledged the Defendant’s joint tort liability on the ground that the Plaintiff acquired and exercised the management right of E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, on the premise that the management right is a benefit worthy of legal protection and thus unlawfully infringed upon it, the Plaintiff’s exercise of management right and the Defendant knowingly purchased the instant shares and exercised voting right against the Plaintiff’s intent of members of K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K”) against the Plaintiff’s exercise of management right and that B sold the instant shares owned by K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K”) against the intent of members of the K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K Co.”).

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court’s determination is justifiable. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the subject to whom management rights accrue, the legal nature of management rights and the judgment criteria for illegality of infringement of management

B. As to the ground of appeal No. 4, "the date on which a person becomes aware of the damage or the perpetrator" under Article 766(1) of the Civil Act, which serves as the starting point of the short-term extinctive prescription of a claim for damages due to a tort, means the time when the person actually and specifically recognized the facts of the requirements of the tort, such as the occurrence of the damage, the existence of

Furthermore, at any time, the facts of the above requirements for the tort are realistic and specific.