A. On July 19, 2016, the Plaintiff, a liquor supplier, entered into a liquor supply contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant, which operates a restaurant under the name of “B” on the following grounds: (a) for three years, under the condition of exclusive supply, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement on subsidies (hereinafter “instant agreement”); and (b) thereafter, leased KRW 8 million to the Defendant at no interest rate.

1. The defendant is obligated to keep the support of the plaintiff and manage it as its original state.

2. In the following cases, the defendant naturally loses the benefit of time, and the defendant unilaterally reversed this contract:

1) When the Defendant received from a third party a seizure, provisional seizure or provisional disposition, or a request for auction or declaration of bankruptcy, the Defendant changed the purpose of its business to a third party, or traded with the sales of other alcoholic beverages.

(1) An exception is made when the transferee is to be supplied with the goods handled by the Plaintiff on the condition that the above support is accepted and is engaged in the business.

3. Where the defendant does not deal with alcoholic beverages recommended by the plaintiff

4. After the Defendant unilaterally terminates this Agreement, the Defendant shall compensate, in violation of this Agreement, for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff for breach of this Agreement, twice the above loan, and shall pay damages for delay of 20% per annum from the cancellation of this Agreement to the completion of payment with respect to the subsidized goods and the credit obligation amount, which is the price for goods.

7. The Defendant, even if having repaid the subsidy in lump sum, should be supplied for three years from the date of the Plaintiff’s final support.

B. However, on July 25, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the instant contract will be reversed, and next day returned KRW 8 million to the Plaintiff’s account.

[Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Eul's evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of recognition prior to the determination of the cause of the claim, the defendant is from the plaintiff.