1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance are dismissed or added as stated in Paragraph (2) below; and (b) the judgment of the defendant on the defendant’s new argument in this court is added as stated in Paragraph (3) below, and thus, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance pursuant to Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. On the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, the Court of Appeals set forth in Section 4, No. 16, “An appellate trial case” shall be deemed to read “an appellate trial case (Seoul District Court Decision 2018No158)”.

The "37 No. 37" of the 8th page 9 shall be deemed to be "37,40".

Part 8 "Each video" in Part 10 shall be read as "each video and the result of the on-site inspection by this Court".

Part 8: The following shall be added to Part 18:

On July 14, 2016, the Plaintiff added to the bottom of the instant singing, “Sing-outs and answers. Not rice for singing-outing into the Ging-out, but rice for general use.” On the following day, the Plaintiff revised the term “rice only” as “rice.”

It appears that the Plaintiff made it clear that the meaning of the phrase “Troman” was used by rice with no content added, and that the phrase was modified in order to avoid misunderstanding.

Part 8, Chapters 19 through 5 are as follows.

On July 30, 2016, the Plaintiff asked the Plaintiff “O” user of Plaintiff Blog on July 30, 2016, that “I ambre,” “I ambre,” “I ambre,” and “I ambre, which does not add active curriculum,” and “I ambre, I ambre,” and I ambrely interpreted the part.”

The author said that he did not add the curriculum.

The rice with the addition of glutain shall be.