1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 27, 2015, the Plaintiff agreed to receive KRW 185,00 from the Defendant a construction subsidy, KRW 5,000, KRW 508,800 (=21,200 per month x 24 months) and KRW 110,000 for an existing telecommunications company’s penalty when concluding a mobile phone sales contract and a mobile communications subscription contract under the name of Nonparty C, who is the Plaintiff, who is the Plaintiff.

B. On August 3, 2015, the Plaintiff reported the Defendant to the mobile telephone unfair conduct reporting center on the ground that the payment of the Defendant’s paint subsidy and the penalty for breach of contract constitutes an illegal subsidy under the Mobile Device Distribution Improvement Act.

C. On August 10, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 7,000,000 to the Plaintiff by August 31, 2015 (hereinafter “instant agreement”) on condition that the Plaintiff withdraw the said report (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, Gap evidence 4-1, Gap evidence 5, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 7,00,000 to the plaintiff according to the agreement of this case since the plaintiff withdrawn the report of illegal subsidies in accordance with the agreement of this case.

On this ground, the defendant asserts that since the agreement of this case is null and void in violation of social order, the defendant is not obligated to pay the agreement of this case to the plaintiff.

Although the Defendant expressed that the agreement in this case is null and void as an unfair legal act under Article 104 of the Civil Act, the Defendant asserts to the effect that it is against social justice that the Defendant’s payment of large amount of agreement is contrary to the conditions for withdrawal of the above declaration, which is in the circumstance of the Plaintiff’s filing of a report on illegal subsidies. As such, the Defendant’s assertion of invalidation under Article 10

(b) Determination 1 on the grounds of claim.