1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The plaintiff's attached agreement against the defendant on January 1, 2014 is based on the annexed agreement.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following dismissal. Thus, this is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary part] From the last day of the second page, the part of the second page 1 "Repaid......... are repaid, and 58,487 won was accumulated in relation to the repayment of the recovery."

Part III, not more than the last one, and not more than 2-B

The part of the port shall be dried as follows:

B. The part concerning the claim for confirmation of non-existence of the collection obligation of this case 1) The plaintiff asserted by the parties was dismissed after the plaintiff served as the head of the defendant's B branch for a more than one year, and thus, "within two years" among the criteria for recovery stipulated in the contract of this case, "total amount of subsidies: when dismissal is made within two years" 】 50%" (hereinafter "standards for recovery 3") and the criteria for recovery of 100% of the total amount of subsidies when dismissal within

(2) The Defendant’s claim that the collection obligation of this case does not exist, since the Defendant already repaid the money exceeding 50% of the settlement subsidy received from the Defendant. On the other hand, the Defendant asserts that the collection obligation of this case does not exist, on the other hand, the collection standard of subparagraphs 2 through 3 was premised on the achievement of the standard business under the agreement of this case. As such, the Plaintiff’s claim that the amount calculated in proportion to the standard business (3 million won of the settlement of the branch office monthly) should be repaid (hereinafter “standard for recovery

2) The Defendant is serving as the B Branch in consideration of the purpose of the instant arrangement, the objective meaning of the relevant language and text, the reasonable intent of the parties who concluded the agreement, etc.

The plaintiff is dismissed within two years, but the amount of settlement subsidy to which the collection standard of 1 was applied due to poor business performance exceeds 50% of the total amount of the relevant subsidy, not the third recovery standard, but the first recovery standard.