All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. The grounds for the plaintiff's claim are stated in the annexed sheet.

B. 1) Determination as to the claim against Defendant B on the advertisement of the product was made in a false manner to the extent that it would be subject to criticism in light of the duty of good faith. However, even if the director of a certain size in the advertisement was accompanied by the advertisement, it cannot be deemed a deception if it would be acceptable in light of the general commercial practice and the good faith principle (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Da55601, 55618, May 29, 2001). 2) In light of such legal principles, each of the statements in health class, No. 4 through 9, No. 14, No. 14, and No. 15, and No. 15, and each fact inquiry about the head of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and the head of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the result of this part of the plaintiff's claim on this premise is insufficient to accept.

C. In light of the written evidence evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and 7 as to the claim against Defendant C Co., Ltd., it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff concluded an investment contract with the Defendant C Co., Ltd. operating multi-level marketing business verbally, as alleged in the evidence Nos. 4 and 12. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim on this premise cannot be accepted.

2. For this reason, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is rejected, and it is so decided as per Disposition.