1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiffs are married couple, and the defendant is punished by the plaintiff A.

B. The plaintiffs operated D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”), which is a representative of D, owned a total of 10,000 shares of D (one share amount of 5,000 won per share) and actually managed D, and the plaintiff B as a auditor of D.

C. Around September 2012, the Defendant entered into an underwriting agreement with the Plaintiffs (hereinafter “instant underwriting agreement”) with the content that the acquisition price shall be set at KRW 340,000,000 and that the acquisition price shall be set at KRW 340,00.

According to the instant underwriting agreement, the Plaintiffs resigned from the position of internal director and auditor, who is the representative of each D on September 25, 2012. On the same day, the Defendant and the Defendant’s wife E were newly appointed as the inside director and auditor who are the representative of each D, and each registration of change was completed on the corporate register of D on the same day.

E. The defendant has taken over D from the plaintiffs until now (D's business rights, customers, assets, and employment relationships of its employees have been transferred).

F. Around March 2013, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant transferred 6,000 shares of D (the shares listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table) owned by the Plaintiff to the Defendant at KRW 30,000,000,000, and the Plaintiff B prepared each share transfer contract and written confirmation of the fact that the shares of D (the shares listed in paragraph (2) of the attached Table) are transferred to the Defendant at KRW 20,000,000,000.

G. On March 31, 2013, the Plaintiffs reported to the competent tax office on the transfer of shares on March 31, 2013 (the Plaintiff transferred 6,000 shares of D on March 31, 2013, and Plaintiff B transferred 4,00 shares of D on March 31, 2013 to each Defendant).

On the other hand, on February 10, 2014, Plaintiff A was the competent tax office on January 31, 2013.