A. On July 2, 2010, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a contract for the supply of goods on consignment goods of the Armed Forces Welfare Foundation, and the part related to the instant case is as follows.

Article 2 (Matters to be Observed for Transactions)

1. During the term of this contract, the Plaintiff should make every effort to ensure that the Defendant’s single or multiple products can be selected as a consignment product of the Armed Forces Welfare Foundation.

2. The defendant shall supply high-quality goods to the welfare team at reasonable prices by perfect quality control.

Article 3 (Term of Contract and Termination of Contract)

1. The term of validity of a contract shall be set at three years from October 1, 2010, and if the defendant's product is not selected as a product entrusted by the National Armed Forces within two years during the first term of the contract, the contract may be terminated at the defendant's will.

2. The plaintiff or the defendant shall notify the termination of the contract one month prior to the expiration of the contract term, and may renew the contract by mutual agreement.

Article 5 (Payment of Fees)

1. The defendant shall pay 23% of the defendant's monthly settlement amount to the plaintiff in accordance with the terms and conditions of payment under the contract for the supply of goods to the National Armed Forces Welfare Group and B after the selection and sale of consigned goods.

Article 6 (Promotion of Sales and Minimum Return of Goods)

1. The plaintiff shall pay at least 40% of the fees that the plaintiff received from the defendant to the (mainly) and 12 military supply companies, both of which the plaintiff is involved, for the purpose of promoting the defendant's product sales, and shall make every effort to promote the defendant's product sales.

B. Since then, the Defendant’s goods were selected as goods entrusted by the Armed Forces, and the Defendant supplied goods to the Armed Forces Welfare Corps from December 2, 2010 to December 2, 2013, and received a total of KRW 831,429,222 as the price for goods.

C. From September 201 to February 2014, the Defendant paid KRW 137,075,548 to the Plaintiff several times as fees under the instant product supply contract.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, A.