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

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, and the reasons for the court’s explanation is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for adding the judgment as stipulated in paragraph 2. As such, it is consistent with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

under paragraph 8 of the title "20 million won" shall be deemed "58 billion won";

(b)it shall be amended from 6th page “Defendant D” to 4, respectively, to:

It is difficult to readily conclude that Defendant D took personal funds of the Plaintiff Company solely on the ground of the fact that there was an omission or error in the book, and the amount Defendant D embezzled by Defendant D appears to have been disbursed for the Plaintiff Company. In such a situation, there is no specific proof as to the fact that Defendant D used funds for personal purposes, and there is a lack to recognize only the entries in Articles 3 through 21, and thus, it is difficult to deem that Defendant D embezzled them. Therefore, this part of the Plaintiffs’ assertion is without merit.

(c) in Part 6, paragraph 9, “The fact that there has been a non-suspected disposition in the Prosecutor’s Office”; “The Prosecutor’s appeal against it has been dismissed; and the application for a ruling has also been dismissed”;

(d) modify, below the sixth, “71,313,858” as “51,835,177”, respectively.

2. In accordance with the trust relationship with Defendant D, the Plaintiffs entered into an implied agreement to use necessary funds from around 2003 to complete payment, and to enter them in an account book to “post settlement.” Although Defendant D has a duty to faithfully enter the contents of the financial transaction between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants, it would bring KRW 1,060,47,365 in total without recording the account book, and would bring KRW 508,642,188 in total, and would inflict damages on the Plaintiff Company, 551,835,17, which is equivalent to the difference, on behalf of the Plaintiff Company.