1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the defendant (appointed) who falls under the part ordering payment under paragraph (2) below.

1. In the first instance trial, the Plaintiff sought compensation of KRW 45,810,050 for active damages due to a violation of the Fair Transactions in Franchise Business Act (hereinafter “Franchising Business Act”) or a tort under the Civil Act (hereinafter “Franchising Business Act”) from the Defendant and the appointed parties C (hereinafter “Defendant, etc.”) around the first instance trial, including the difference between the agreed amount paid by the Plaintiff to J and the amount collected by selling L L’s goodwill, KRW 41,00,000,000,000 and the amount collected by the Plaintiff’s sales of L’s goodwill, and KRW 4,810,050,000,000,000 in total, KRW 33,186,720,00 for lost earnings, and damages for delay. In addition, the Plaintiff sought compensation against the Defendant for the aforementioned amount as KRW 45,810,050 for unjust enrichment, and both of the first instance court and the first instance court dismissed the claim.

On the other hand, the plaintiff appealed against the defendant et al. with the same primary and conjunctive claim, and only the claim against the defendant et al. for payment of the above KRW 41 million interest or delay damages. Thus, this court asserts that the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the claim of the above KRW 41 million (the defendant shall not be deemed to have lodged an appeal against the appointed party C in light of the description in the petition of appeal. The plaintiff's petition of appeal is obvious in the record that the plaintiff omitted the indication of "(appointed party)" and the list of the appointed parties after the defendant in the petition of appeal, but it is clearly clear that the plaintiff appealed against the appointed party C in the main purport of appeal, and thus the above argument of the defendant is not accepted).

3. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The primary argument is that the Defendant has jurisdiction by specifying the delivery area for a certain number of households to the store owners.