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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. The status of the Plaintiff is a company aimed at the comprehensive liquor wholesale business, etc., and the Defendant is a person who registered his/her business with the trade name “C” on June 29, 2017 as well as established D Co., Ltd. D for the purpose of performing business, restaurant business, etc. on July 17, 2017 (hereinafter “foreign Co., Ltd.”) and becomes its representative and supplies alcoholic beverages from the Plaintiff.

B. On July 11, 2017, the Plaintiff, while selling liquor to the Defendant, who operated “C” from around July 11, 2017, set the following agreement with the Defendant on August 9, 2017 (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

(2) Upon entering into an agreement, the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with a subsidy of KRW 3 million. The Plaintiff provided the Defendant with a cash of KRW 3 million on the condition that he/she supplies an alcoholic beverage to the Defendant. The Defendant, based on the date of receiving the Plaintiff’s support, agreed to perform compulsory transactions for two years on the basis of the date of receiving the Plaintiff’s support, and all legal responsibilities are fulfilled at the time of nonperformance. In the event of nonperformance of the agreement, the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff the full amount of the subsidies, and simultaneously compensates the Plaintiff twice the subsidies for penalty (unperformance of compulsory transactions, etc.). (2) The Plaintiff provided alcoholic beverages to the Defendant from July 11, 2017 to December 2018, the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with alcoholic beverages to the Defendant’s individual operating the “C”, and the Defendant provided alcoholic beverages to the Non-Party Company represented by the Defendant. < Amended by Act No. 15073, Oct. 10, 2018>

[Evidence] Facts without a partial dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, 10 (including each number), Eul evidence No. 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion and the Defendant, while entering into the instant agreement, set the monthly sales at least KRW 300-4 million, set the period of compulsory trade at two years. The monthly minimum sales did not exceed the above amount. Moreover, the Defendant’s closure of its operation without notifying the Plaintiff, thereby violating the duty of transactions for two years.