1. The Plaintiff’s appeal against Defendant C and D and the Plaintiff of Defendants B, E, and F.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning the instant case is as follows, except where the court makes a dismissal or adds a judgment to this court under paragraph (2). Thus, it is identical to the reasoning of the first instance judgment under Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The draft of the Agreement (hereinafter referred to as “the draft of the Agreement”) shall be added following the 10th anniversary of the judgment of the first instance.

The "Agreement" in the 11th sentence, 2th sentence, 6th sentence, 9th sentence, and 4th sentence of the first instance judgment shall be amended to "the draft of this case".

2. The abbreviation of this court’s additional judgment is based on the judgment of the court of first instance.

A. As to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff asserted in this court that “The period of extinctive prescription does not run because the final agreement was not settled and the due date has not yet arrived,” or that the ten-year period of extinctive prescription has not yet expired since the damage claim due to the non-performance due to Defendant D’s double transfer of H stocks, which was the damage claim for the non-performance due to Defendant D’s double transfer of stocks. In contrast, even if the extinctive prescription of the final agreement was completed on June 30, 2016, Defendant C provided real estate to M designated by the Plaintiff on November 15, 2013 and Defendant F provided real estate as collateral security for the instant final agreement amount, and Defendant C’s remainder on behalf of the Defendants approved the obligation, such as partially repaying the amount to the Plaintiff around 2014.”

The above assertion made by the plaintiff in this court is not different from the contents of the plaintiff's assertion in the first instance court. The first instance court's decision rejecting this part of the plaintiff's assertion is justified even if both the evidence submitted in the first instance court and the Gap's additional evidence submitted in this court were examined.

B. As to Defendant B, E, and F (hereinafter “Defendant B, etc.”)’s assertion, Defendant B, etc. is the grounds for appeal in this court.