1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justified even if each evidence submitted to the court of first instance was presented to this court.

The reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows, except for dismissal or addition as follows, and therefore, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

[Supplementary or additional parts] Part 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be deemed to be "D's shareholder," and "D's shareholder," respectively.

Part 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance, "by the 5th day of the same month" shall be deemed "by the 15th day of the same month".

Part 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the term "as such" in Part 10 shall be deemed to be "as such."

Part 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance, "property" in Part 13 is "investment securities out of assets", and "2.5 billion won" in Part 14 is "A about 2.5 billion won", respectively.

Part 6 of the judgment of the first instance is "M" in Part 9 of the judgment of the first instance, and part 10 is "M" and part 10 is "re-employment" as "period of employment."

Nos. 6, 14, and 16 of the judgment of the first instance shall also be dismissed or added as follows:

【6) After the Plaintiff established the instant pledge to the Defendant, the Plaintiff received dividends from D on June 25, 2012, June 13, 2013, and July 25, 2014, totaling KRW 150 million. The Plaintiff received dividends from D in 2012 and 2013, without the Defendant’s claim as the pledgee. The Plaintiff received dividends with the Defendant’s consent in 2014.

On July 15, 2014, the Defendant consented to the receipt of dividends in 2014 by the Plaintiff on July 15, 2014, and expressed that the Plaintiff did not object to the receipt of dividends in 2012 and 2013.

A person shall be appointed.

2. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.