beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs and defendant E are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal between the Plaintiff A and the Defendants are incurred.
Reasons
The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as stated in the part of the judgment of the first instance, except where the appeal is made in paragraph (2) below or the parties are added to the judgment on the allegations in this court. Thus, it is citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
(Other grounds alleged by the Plaintiffs and Defendant E in the appeal do not differ significantly from the allegations in the first instance court, and even if all evidence submitted by the first instance court and this court are examined, the first instance judgment is justifiable). The part to be dismissed or added is as follows between the first instance judgment and the second instance judgment.
(3) The Defendants filed a claim for damages under the Commercial Act against the Defendants were either a director of H or a person who actually participated in the duties of a director, and neglected to perform the duty of loyalty and duty of care, which is his duties, so that they could not be returned to Defendant D or F, with knowledge that they could not continue and continue to engage in the crowdfunding business, by hiding it, etc., and could commit a tort of entering into a lease agreement with the Plaintiff on September 25, 2014 between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendants are liable for compensating the Plaintiff for damages equivalent to the deposit amount in accordance with Articles 401 and 401-2 of the Commercial Act. Accordingly, the Defendants are liable for compensating the Plaintiff for damages in accordance with Article 17 of the first instance judgment of the first instance judgment, “B Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, 8-C” as “B No. 1 through 3, 7 through 9,” and “No. 2981 of the lower court’s appeal No. 1997.
“The appeal was filed and the Daejeon District Court rendered a judgment of innocence on September 25, 2019 by the judgment of not guilty. The Supreme Court Decision 2018No991 Decided December 13, 2019 was rendered in the final appeal and the judgment of not guilty became final and conclusive.
"Flags".
No. 14 of the judgment of the court of first instance, No. 16, 17 of the judgment "2."