1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The defendant's purport of the claim is B/C on April 23, 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s status and the general status of the Plaintiff stated that the Plaintiff shall allow franchisees to operate a dental license using his/her own business mark “C” and that the Plaintiff shall provide support, education, and control for the management, business activities, etc. thereby, and that in return, a person who receives franchise fees is given a franchisee a right to operate a franchise store, and that the Defendant’s written resolution of the Fair Transactions in Franchise Business Act (amended by Act No. 14812, Apr. 18, 2017; hereinafter “FF business Act”) was amended by Act No. 14812, Oct. 19, 2017; however, it is indicated as above in accordance with the rules on the indication of the judgment.

It is a franchiser that is stipulated in subparagraph 2 of Article 2.

The general status of the plaintiff is as listed below.

The net income of the company from the total amount of its capital sales / The number of regular employees employed on September 73, 2014, 2015, 2015, 175, 245, 245 191, 282, 2860 219, 7535, 6221/1, 381, 257, 2015, 2015, 2015, 245, 245, 215, 860 219, 753, 61

(b) The market structure and actual status of franchise business is operated in the form that a franchiser permits franchisees to use business marks, such as trademarks, and provides them with various support, such as know-how in the overall business. The number of franchisers registered with the Fair Trade Commission in an information disclosure statement, the number of business marks, and the number of member stores and directly operated stores at the end of the immediately preceding year are as listed in the following table:

In the former portion, in 2013 2,678 2,973,482 3,910 4,268 3,3113,691 4,88 4,845,273 2015 2,678 2,678 2,973,482 3,268 3,3113,691 4,88 4,845,273 201 means the number of chain stores and directly operated stores of the franchisor registered in the pertinent year.

176,788 190,730 194,199 208,104 218,994 218,326 12,619 12,869 15,459 16,854

C. The Plaintiff’s franchise business operation type “C” franchise store.