1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall pay to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) the full amount of KRW 46,91,340 and its payment from October 18, 2016.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Plaintiff is a company that runs a shower shower and a gift food franchise business using the trade name “B,” and is an exclusive licensee who has filed for trademark registration related to “B,” and who has obtained permission for exclusive use from “B.” The Defendant is a franchise business operator who entered into a franchise agreement with the Plaintiff on December 17, 2015 with the Plaintiff regarding “B” of the Plaintiff’s franchise business.

B. On December 17, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a franchise agreement with the Defendant on December 17, 2015, determined that the period of contract D, 10,000,000 won for the Defendant and the store location, 10,000 won for educational expenses, 2,000,000 won for contract performance guarantee, 2,00,000 won for contract deposit, and 1% for the sales of franchise fee (credit sales) for B cafeteria stores (hereinafter “instant franchise agreement”).

(2) The main contents of the instant franchise agreement are ① granting the Defendant the right to operate a franchise store using B’s business marks, and all distribution margin is not added in the supply of goods. ② The Defendant paid 1% of the sales revenue (credit sales) to the Plaintiff in return for the use of business marks and management support.

3) According to the instant franchise agreement, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 24,200,000 in total including value added tax on the amount of KRW 10,000,00 for the franchise fee, KRW 10,000 for educational expenses, KRW 200,00 for contract deposit, KRW 200,000 for each money. (c) On March 18, 2016, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to correct the failure of the POS system designated by the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff did not install the POS system, the exclusive goods designated by the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s failure to use the exclusive goods, and the Plaintiff’s refusal to wear uniforms designated by the Plaintiff, and sent an official door to the effect that the instant franchise agreement may be terminated unless the correction is made.

2. On April 7, 2016, the Defendant deleted the provision that the Plaintiff unilaterally does not add the distribution margin of the instant franchise agreement to the Plaintiff, and entered into a contract.