1. Defendant D and Defendant Press Co., Ltd. shared with each of the plaintiffs 22,335,00 won and its corresponding amount.

1. Claim against Defendant D or Defendant Press Corporation;

(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the reasons for each claim in attached Form;

(b) Judgment by public notice (Defendant D, Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act), which is deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

A. On January 2006, the Plaintiffs purchased shares in Gyeonggi-gun E and F forest in KRW 22.5 million each between Defendant Press Co., Ltd. and Defendant Press Co., Ltd.

Defendant C, as an employee of the above company, committed an illegal act by deceiving the Plaintiffs to purchase the said real estate, by deceiving the Plaintiffs as having good land development prospects, even though the said real estate was not an investment-oriented value.

Therefore, Defendant C has a duty to pay KRW 22,335,00 and damages for delay in collaboration with other Defendants.

In addition, the plaintiffs cancel the above sales contract concluded by deception by service of the application for modification of the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim as of May 9, 2016. Thus, the defendants are obligated to pay 22,335,000 won out of their respective purchase amounts and damages for delay.

B. The written evidence Nos. 1 through 11 of the judgment alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that Defendant C, together with other Defendants, deceiving the Plaintiffs in relation to the above sales contract, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, it is difficult to accept the Plaintiffs’ assertion of tort against Defendant C.

In addition, according to the plaintiffs' assertion, since the parties to the sales of this case are the press money for the plaintiffs and the stock company, the cancellation of the sales contract by deception cannot seek restitution from the defendant C who is not a party.

Therefore, we cannot accept the Plaintiffs’ assertion of restitution due to the cancellation of the sales contract for Defendant C.

C. Accordingly, the plaintiffs' claims against the defendant C are not accepted.