1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that manufactures and sells Onnuri gift products, and Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) is a company that produces and sells gold-free products, and Defendant B, as the representative director of the Defendant Co., Ltd., operates an individual business entity in the name of “G” separately from the Defendant Co., Ltd.

B. On April 22, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with Defendant B to sell the Plaintiff’s machinery and equipment listed in attached Table 1, and each of the vehicles listed in attached Table 2, with the price of KRW 190 million as indicated in attached Table 2.

On April 23, 2015, the Plaintiff’s sequence 2 attached Table 2

1. The receipt number D, the same list as that concerning the motor vehicles stated;

2. The receipt number E, and the list of the same motor vehicles as indicated;

3. A registration for transfer of ownership was completed with the receipt number F for the indicated vehicles, and around that time, the machinery and equipment listed in attached Table 1 and each of the vehicles listed in attached Table 2 were delivered to the Defendant.

C. On April 22, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant Company to sell the machinery and equipment listed in the separate sheet 3 attached to the Plaintiff’s ownership at KRW 50,000,000 (hereinafter “each of the instant sales contracts” in combination with the above sales contract with the Plaintiff and the Defendant B), and around that time, delivered the said machinery and equipment to the Defendant Company.

[Reasons for Recognition] Class A 2, Class 3, Class B, Class 1 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. (1) Defendant A, who provided the operating subsidy to the Plaintiff, was anticipated to sell or seize the Plaintiff’s company’s property for reasons of delayed repayment of loans, etc., and thus, he first moved the machinery of the Plaintiff’s factory to the Defendant company’s factory, etc. to the Defendant company’s factory and offered a joint operation at the same time. Accordingly, the contract was prepared by pretending to sell and sell the machinery, equipment, etc. as stated in attached Forms 1 through 3.

Therefore, each of the instant sales contracts between the Plaintiff and the Defendants is false declaration of conspiracy.