1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 3,300,000 for each of the Plaintiff A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I; and (b) from April 1, 2016 to July 27, 2016 for each of them.

1. In full view of the facts that there is no dispute over the remaining claims of the plaintiffs except for the plaintiff J, the entries in Gap evidence 2 through 5 (including various numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings in the testimony of Eul witness L, the plaintiffs paid KRW 3,300,00 to the defendant with respect to the app "M" developed by the defendant around April 2015, and received KRW 300 shares from the defendant, and thereafter, L return the above 30 shares to the defendant around January 2016 by the defendant around February 3, 2016 for the plaintiff, Eul, D, E, F, H, H, and I to return the above 30 shares to the above plaintiffs by 3,300 shares and KRW 70,000,000 to the above plaintiffs until February 28, 2016; the remaining 30,000 shares were returned to the defendant by 30,000 shares and KRW 30,300,000 each of the above shares were not returned to the plaintiffs.

The defendant asserts that the defendant paid KRW 3,300,000 to become the franchise store operator of the business run by the defendant, but decided to cancel the contract at the defendant's responsibility. However, the defendant did not enter into an agency contract with the plaintiffs, and the plaintiffs merely did not have concluded an agency contract with the plaintiffs and decided to re-purchase shares in good faith because it is difficult to circumstances, and the plaintiffs merely decided to purchase shares in good faith. ② The plaintiffs were the persons engaged in multi-stage activities with N and the plaintiff J, and N and the plaintiff J received fees of approximately KRW 17,00,000 from the defendant, but appealed about KRW 17,7,000 from the above 17,000,000 from the defendant, and again purchased shares in good faith.