1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasons why this court should explain concerning this part of the facts of recognition are the same as the corresponding part of the " fact of recognition" in the corresponding part of the 2nd judgment of the court of first instance from 11 to 6th judgment. Thus, this court shall accept it as it is by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Determination on the cause of the claim 1) The former Capital Markets Act (amended by Act No. 11845, May 28, 2013; hereinafter the same applies)

Article 176(4)1 of the same Act provides that “no one shall cause a fluctuation in the market price of underlying assets of exchange-traded derivatives with an intention to earn, or cause a third party to earn, unjust profits in connection with trading listed securities or exchange-traded derivatives.” Article 177(1) of the same Act provides that “any person who violates Article 176 shall be liable for damages sustained by a person who trades or entrusts trading listed securities or exchange-traded derivatives at the price formed by such offense.” This provision provides that “The person shall be liable for damages caused by such trading or entrustment to an investor by hindering fair formation of market prices in financial investment instruments markets, thereby preventing investors from causing damages and impairing investors’ trust in such market. 2) In light of the above fact-finding, Defendant Hong Kong Branch’s C, D, E, and Defendant B’s construction of an speculative scheme on the decline in market price index, and, at the same time, Plaintiff’s 200 share price manipulation suffered from the simultaneous sale of stocks through the pertinent 200 share price fluctuation (hereinafter “the Defendants’ 70 share price fluctuation”).