1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 26,752,920 won and the period from December 1, 2012 to March 3, 2015.

1. The following facts may be acknowledged if there is no dispute between the parties, or if the purport of the entire pleadings is added to each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 8 (including paper numbers).

The Plaintiff is a company engaged in the manufacture and sale of various kinds of fruit products, and Defendant A served from May 1, 201 to September 1, 201 as an operating employee at the Plaintiff’s Seoul 2 area, Southern orchard, etc. from around May 1, 201, and Defendant B and C are the referees of Defendant A.

B. Around the time of retirement of Defendant A, it was revealed that Defendant A did not deposit KRW 26,752,920 in the company compared to the sales amount. Defendant A, on September 25, 2012, prepared a written statement of performance to the Plaintiff, stating that “The amount received as sales amount was not deposited in the company but was individually used by the company,” and that “The amount was not deposited in the company, which was part of the amount received as sales amount, was used by the company,” and that it was agreed to pay the amount by November 30, 2012.”

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the claim against Defendant A, the defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the agreed amount of KRW 26,752,920 and delay damages.

The defendant asserts that the above person's written statement and the written statement of performance are prepared by the defective declaration of intention in accordance with the coercion of the place of business that the withdrawal is made in front and formally, and that it is cancelled by the delivery of the written reply of this case. However, it is not sufficient to recognize that the witness's testimony alone was by the defective declaration of intention, such as coercion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. According to the above facts of recognition as to the claim against Defendant B and C, since Defendant A did not deposit KRW 26,752,920, compared to the amount of sales, and thereby suffered damage equivalent to the above amount from the Plaintiff, Defendant B and C, who are the referees of Defendant A, are the Defendant A.