1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The ground for appeal by the plaintiff citing the judgment of the court of first instance is 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, and it is accepted by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, as it is, given that the reasoning of the judgment of this court is the same as that of the judgment of the first instance except for the following addition.

[Supplementary or additional parts] In the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance, the "foreign company" in the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be deemed to be the "the company of this case".

Part 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance is subject to the dismissal or addition of Paragraph 8 of the same Article as "in case of an impossibility of performance, or the defendant has prevented the fulfillment of the conditions of rescission concerning the payment of periodical payments against the good faith."

The last page of the judgment of the first instance court is "A evidence Nos. 1 and 3" as "B evidence Nos. 1 and 3."

In the fourth judgment of the first instance, the “instant judgment” of the first instance judgment shall be deemed to be “the final judgment of this case”.

Part 4 of the judgment of the first instance shall be dismissed or added to "in the position" of Part 14 as "in the position, it shall be an auditor who is a position at the time when the defendant is to retire or a position equivalent thereto".

Under the fourth sentence of the judgment of the first instance, the second action is dismissed or added as follows: “The defendant is a position of auditor or equivalent position at the time of the retirement of the defendant as a position.”

2. The Plaintiff asserts that, in light of the principle of good faith, a compulsory execution against the Plaintiff should be rejected by the Defendant based on the instant final judgment.

However, solely on the sole basis of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant offered to the Plaintiff the belief that the Defendant would not enforce compulsory execution based on the instant final judgment.

Inasmuch as the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have a legitimate state, the Plaintiff cannot be said to have such belief.