2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

A. The Plaintiff, while serving as C’s insurance solicitor from July 1, 201 to December 6, 2013, agreed to be paid at the time when part of the insurance allowances that the Plaintiff sold insurance products and received from C was accumulated in C, and the period of retirement passed after the retirement.

B. After withdrawal of C, around December 2015, the Plaintiff requested C to pay the reserve funds and received a statement from C that the remaining reserve funds remaining after making various deductions, etc. as of June 2015 (hereinafter “instant reserve funds”). Since then C received KRW 2,000,000 from C, and did not receive the remainder.

C. On February 16, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the Defendant to the effect that the Defendant, who had worked as an intra-company director (from June 5, 2012 to March 20, 2015) and representative director (from November 11, 2013 to March 10, 2015) of the instant reserve arbitrarily used the instant reserve for any other purpose, embezzled the said reserve for any other purpose. On January 20, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a claim for summary order of KRW 5,00,000 as a fact of the crime of occupational embezzlement against the Defendant, but thereafter, the Defendant filed a claim for summary order of KRW 5,00,000 with the Suwon District Court as a formal trial by the Defendant, was acquitted, and the Prosecutor filed an appeal against the Plaintiff during the appellate trial.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s determination as to the cause of the instant claim is to prepare for the case where C suffers losses due to the short-term termination of the insurance products sold by the Plaintiff, etc., on the ground that the Defendant, even though having used the products for other purposes, embezzled at his own discretion.