2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. The Defendant Company started advertising of Jeju-do travel products using TV home shopping in 2016, and, if the Defendant Company sold the travel products through Home shopping, it decided to proceed with the tourism schedule for customers who purchased the travel products from Jeju-do as a local tour agent in Jeju-do (hereinafter referred to as “Sland company”).

B. The Defendant Company paid to the Plaintiff Company the so-called “fields bonus” of 130,000 won per travel customer (after raising 15,000 won per person at the Plaintiff’s request) and from June 7, 2016. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 27273, Jun. 7, 2016>

8. up to 31. 31. up to 920 customers paid a total of KRW 133,400,000 as shown in the Appendix.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant Company received KRW 5,532,00,000 from the Plaintiff Company on May 16, 2016, and KRW 3,762,00 on May 23, 2016, from the Plaintiff Company as payment for airline tickets transactions secured and supplied by the Defendant Company to the Plaintiff Company. It is irrelevant to the said transaction.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 3, 4, Eul 1 through 10, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination as to the Plaintiff A’s claim for settlement of accounts

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was paid by the Defendant Company KRW 29,00,00, including all expenses incurred in travelling, such as aviation charges, lodging charges, local transportation expenses, food expenses, and admission fees for tourist destinations, and the profits of the Defendant Company.

In addition, if the Defendant Company send a tourer to Jeju-do with only aviation charges paid to the airline company, the Plaintiff Company, a local travel agent, paid all tourism expenses incurred in Jeju-do, such as vehicle expenses, accommodation expenses, food expenses, tourist destination fees, etc., on behalf of the Defendant Company, to the local company, and charged the Defendant Company with the said expenses after settling the expenses. The Defendant Company, as seen above, has traded in a manner that the Plaintiff Company later pays to the Plaintiff Company.

Therefore, the defendant company is against the plaintiff company.