1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant Future Treatment Co., Ltd. (formerly treated Securities Co., Ltd.; hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Future Treatment”) and Defendant Loh Deposit Investment Advisory Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Loh Deposit”) are corporations engaging in financial investment business prescribed in Article 6(1) of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (hereinafter “Capital Markets Act”). Defendant C is an employee of Defendant Future Treatment Co., Ltd., and Plaintiff A is the representative director of Plaintiff B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff”).

B. Defendant U2C has operated financial investment instruments (hereinafter “instant instruments”) with the content that an investor acquires 20% of the total amount of profit as performance fees if the cumulative return exceeds 18% per annum, and 30% of the total amount of profit if the cumulative return exceeds 18% per annum.

C. On January 27, 2014, the head of the DNA team of Defendant C and Defendant UhC visited the office of Plaintiff B, and explained the instant product to Plaintiff B’s FAudit, G management support team head, and H management support team representative for about 1 hour and 30 minutes, using the Loh Deposit Investment Advisory Note (hereinafter “instant product proposal”).

On February 12, 2014, Defendant C introduced the instant product to Plaintiff A, and sent e-mail with the right to invest in the instant product. The Plaintiffs decided to invest in the instant product after internal review of the instant product.

Pursuant to the product proposal of this case, the product of this case aims to make profits from 0.5% to 1.5% per month regardless of the fluctuation of the COS 200 index.