1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Of the instant lawsuits, Plaintiff N’s Defendant A Co., Ltd.

1. The reasons why this Court uses this part of the basic facts are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of the corresponding parts as follows. As such, this Court cites it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The May 10th of the first instance court's decision "No. 77 Plaintiff N" is "No. 33 Plaintiff B and No. 77 Plaintiff N", and the 13th of the first instance judgment "Plaintiff N" is "Plaintiff B and N", respectively.

B. The third sentence of the sixth sentence of the first instance court’s judgment is referring to “R” as “EI (R’s amended from June 26, 2013).”

(c) evidence 1 to 6, 10 to 75 of “B” No. 11 to 3 of the first instance judgment “B,” respectively, means the court of first instance “B”.

2. Determination on the main safety defense of Defendant Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation

A. The summary of the assertion 1) Plaintiff B filed the instant lawsuit without filing a bankruptcy claim in the bankruptcy procedure against Plaintiff C, D, E, F, and G in the instant lawsuit is unlawful. The part of the claim for confirmation of the bankruptcy claim against Defendant Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation in the instant lawsuit is unlawful. 2) Plaintiff C, D, E, F, and G reported the bankruptcy claim in the bankruptcy procedure against Plaintiff C, E, and the bankruptcy trustee denied the claim for interest among the bankruptcy claims reported by the said Plaintiffs, but the remainder was the Sim. As such, Plaintiff C, E, E, F, and G (hereinafter the above five Plaintiffs “Plaintiff C, etc.”) did not have any interest in the lawsuit against the Defendant Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation in excess of the interest claim denied by the bankruptcy trustee.

3 Plaintiff N merely reported a bankruptcy claim as an agent of EJ in the bankruptcy proceeding against Plaintiff N, and there is no fact that it reported a bankruptcy claim in its name. Thus, it is unlawful to seek the confirmation of a bankruptcy claim in its name.

B. The reasons why this Court has used this part of the recognition are as follows.