1. The Defendant’s KRW 36,00,000 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from March 15, 2017 to September 6, 2017, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is the defendant's words and friendship relationship with each other.

B. On April 19, 2001, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a franchise store agreement with D Co., Ltd. and the Plaintiff as their representative. On May 23, 2001, the Plaintiff and the Defendant completed the business registration with the trade name “E”, the location of the Plaintiff’s name “E”, and the type of business “food” under the Plaintiff’s name.

(2) On October 11, 2002, the Plaintiff newly registered the name of the proprietor of the instant restaurant in the name of the Defendant, and reported the closure of business as to the instant restaurant on September 19, 2002.

C. Since the Defendant paid KRW 2,00,000 from June 26, 2001 to December 201, 201, the Defendant paid KRW 3,000,000 per month to the Plaintiff from August 13, 2001 to December 2014 (in addition to the above amount until August 26, 2013, the Defendant paid KRW 3,30,000 per month by adding up the above amount to KRW 300,00 per month) or KRW 4,30,000 per month.

[Basis] Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence of Nos. 1 through 4 (including any number), Eul evidence of No. 2 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On April 2001, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff invested KRW 93,000,000, respectively, with the Defendant, and jointly operated the instant restaurant, and entered into a partnership agreement with the content that the profits are distributed at the rate of KRW 1:1.

Under the above agreement, the Plaintiff invested KRW 93,000,000, and operated the restaurant of this case jointly with the Defendant from May 23, 2001.

However, from January 2015, the Defendant applied for provisional injunction against the Plaintiff by not distributing profits to the Plaintiff, and by intending to exclude the Plaintiff from the partnership relationship.

On the other hand, the plaintiff notified the defendant of the termination of the partnership agreement through the service of the duplicate of the complaint of this case, and the partnership relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant was terminated.

At the time of the completion of the above business relationship, there are KRW 115,00,000 for the premium of the restaurant of this case, and the defendant has so far.