1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) with KRW 8,500,000.

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance concerning the instant case is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

【The two 19th and two 1th 21th 201 each are 2010. The 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 11st 11st 201st 201. The Plaintiff and the Defendant are aware of the fact that a franchise agreement was entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant with respect to G branch 9,600,000 won. However, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a letter of claim for the termination of the agreement and the return of the price already paid on the grounds of “provision of Information Disclosure” and “Provision of False Information,” and the fact that the content certification letter reached the Plaintiff on January 3, 201. According to the above facts, the franchise agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was terminated on January 3, 2011, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of the contract amount for G branch 5th 5 through 11st 2011 is without merit (the Plaintiff’s claim for the return of information under Article 10(10(2)1) of the Franchise Act can be interpreted.

. The sixth 4th defendant is the plaintiff.

Part VII 17 to 17.