All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal against Defendant D

A. The interpretation of a juristic act clearly establishes the objective meaning that the parties gave to the act of representation. In the event that there is a conflict of opinion on the interpretation of the juristic act between the parties, the interpretation of the juristic act shall be reasonably interpreted in accordance with logical and empirical rules, by comprehensively taking into account the contents of the juristic act, the motive and background leading up to the juristic act, the purpose to achieve it by the juristic act

(2) Article 103 of the Civil Act provides that an act of anti-social order invalidated under Article 103 of the Civil Act includes not only a case where the content of the rights and obligations, which is the object of the juristic act, is contrary to good morals and other social order, but also a case where the contents of the juristic act, even though it is not contrary to social order, are legally forced or the juristic act is contrary to social order conditions or monetary consideration; and the motive of the juristic act indicated or known to the other party is contrary to social order.

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 99Da56833, Feb. 11, 2000).

The judgment below

According to the reasoning and the evidence duly admitted, the following facts are revealed.

(1) (A) around 1990, F established G that is an incorporated foundation (hereinafter “instant incorporated foundation”) that carries out medical research projects, etc. in the field of clinical pathology and special inspection pursuant to Article 32 of the Civil Act, and was appointed to the president. Around April 11, 2000, F established the Defendant medical corporation E (hereinafter “Defendant medical corporation”) pursuant to Article 41 of the former Medical Service Act (wholly amended by Act No. 8366, Apr. 11, 2007) and appointed it to the president.

(B) F is the chief director of the incorporated foundation of this case on November 28, 2006, and F is the chief director of the incorporated foundation of this case on January 2, 2008.