1. The part of the judgment of the first instance against the defendant shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above revocation part.

1. In the first instance trial, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the amount of KRW 217,834, the sum of KRW 200,1200,000,000 and KRW 57,177,834 during the period of the operation of the partnership with the Defendant, as a result of the Plaintiff’s withdrawal from partnership relations with the Defendant, and damages for delay.

The first instance court shall accept a claim for the return of the above share, and the claim for the return of the profit during the period of the above business operation was dismissed, and only the defendant appealed against this, the object of judgment in this court is limited to the claim for the return of the above

2. Basic facts

A. On April 28, 2010, the Defendant entered into a joint operation agreement with C on the following terms (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

C and the defendant jointly operate the Eartistic Institute (hereinafter referred to as the “instant Institute”) which is a franchise store of D Art Institute.

This Agreement shall continue to be maintained unless the parties agree on the settlement of the project relating to the instant private teaching institute.

C's shares are 30% and 70% of the defendant's shares.

The parties have the right to the assets, rights, and profits and losses of the instant driving school according to their respective shares ratio.

The revenue of the instant private teaching institute shall be settled on the basis of the accounting books of the instant private teaching institute prepared by the reasonable accounting standards on the 15th of each month and distributed to the parties in accordance with the said equity ratio.

The Parties may not dispose of, or offer as security for, their own shares and all or any part of the property rights of the instant driving school to a third party without a joint agreement of the Parties.

B. On April 22, 2013, the Defendant established the F Co., Ltd. F (hereinafter “F”) as one shareholder in order to operate the instant private teaching institute in the form of a stock company, and thereafter, F became the operating entity of the instant private teaching institute.

At the time of establishment of F, the representative director was the plaintiff.

C. The Plaintiff was dismissed from the inside director of F on April 17, 2014, and F was not more than G, Inc. on April 22, 2014.