1. Defendant B’s KRW 21,600,000 as well as 5% per annum from November 28, 2015 to April 8, 2016.

Basic Facts

Defendant B filed an application for F patent, completed G patent, and operated the manufacturing business of the said E-Game (name of a product: I; hereinafter “instant game machine”) in the trade name of “H”.

① On October 31, 2006, the Plaintiff’s her husband’s her husband and wife purchased twenty games of this case from Defendant B to Defendant B (700,000 won per 1,50,000 won per 1,000 won). However, if the said games are re-entrusted to the Defendant, the Defendant would operate a siren business for the said 20 games owned by the J, and as a result, Defendant B would pay 80,000 won per her J to the Defendant (A 3).

② On December 15, 2006, K purchased at KRW 20,000 from Defendant B, and at KRW 15,080,000 from Defendant B, K again entrusted the said game machine to the Defendant, the Defendant entered into a siren agreement on the instant game machine owned by K to operate a siren business on KRW 20,00,000, and in return, Defendant B would pay 80,000,000 for each of the said games (A 4).

③ On December 30, 2006, the Plaintiff purchased 10,000,000,000 won for the instant game machine from Defendant B. However, if the Plaintiff re-entrusted the Defendant with the said game machine, the Defendant entered into a siren agreement with the Defendant to operate a siren business regarding 10,00,000 won for each of the instant game machines owned by the Plaintiff, and as a result, Defendant B would pay to the Plaintiff the 80,000 won for each of the instant game machines.

[Grounds for recognition] In full view of the respective statements and the overall purport of the arguments, Gap 2-4, Eul 1-1-3, 2-1, 2-2, 3, and 4, Gap 1, 5, and 6, the plaintiff demanded the defendant Eul to pay the proceeds and return the entrusted amount according to the instant siren contract around 2008, and the defendant Eul demanded the return of the proceeds and the entrusted amount to the defendant Eul around March 19, 208.