1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except for the determination of the Plaintiff as to the assertion added by this court, and thus, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. The additional part of the Plaintiff asserts that the Defendants acquired the money embezzled by E and constitutes stolen goods. In particular, Defendant B’s use of his account to E constitutes a violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act. As such, the Defendants asserted to the effect that the Defendants are liable to compensate for damages caused by the tort, and thus, Defendant B’s use of their account to E cannot be deemed as a tort unless there is evidence to deem that the Defendants recognized the embezzlement of E. However, insofar as Defendant B did not recognize the embezzlement of E, it cannot be deemed that there was a proximate causal relationship between the Defendants’ intentional act or the act of using the account and the damages caused by the Plaintiff’s assertion. Thus, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants should be dismissed in entirety as there is no reasonable ground.

The judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable in its conclusion. Thus, the plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.