The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

purport, purport, and.

1. The court of first instance dismissed both the plaintiff's principal claim and the defendant's counterclaim, and only the defendant appealed, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the part of the defendant's counterclaim claim.

2. The Defendant is a member of the E-si Branch of Busan Metropolitan Area F Branch (hereinafter “F Branch”) in operating the “D Point” in Busan Metropolitan Area, and the Plaintiff is the head of the said branch.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

3. Determination on the cause of the counterclaim

A. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff filed a civil petition with the public official of the Busan F Health Center on the advertisement attachment of the Defendant Ansan-won window, and sent text messages to the members of the E Busan Metropolitan Government Branch’s respective chapters and F Branch’s respective chapters and F Branch’s respective chapters. (hereinafter “instant civil petition filing activities”).

2) In addition, the G organization posted the advertising materials with the price discount to Busan F, and then removed the advertising materials, the F branch posted the advertising materials to G organization’s Internet car page, and the F branch posted the advertising materials to “the act of posting the advertising materials to the Internet.”

A) The F Branch discussed the measures such as employment restraint or observation of caution to the employees who sell products at a low price through the meeting (hereinafter referred to as the “instant sub-council”).

The Plaintiff, as the president of the branch, led the act of the F branch. The Plaintiff’s act is subject to the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (hereinafter “Fair Trade Act”).

(1) The Plaintiff’s act constitutes “unfair collaborative act” under Article 19(1) and the Defendant’s business activities, which are the constituent business entities under Article 26(1)3 of the same Act, is unlawful. (2) The branch of the F branch led by the Plaintiff posted the Defendant’s SNS advertisements on SNS, and the F branch of the F branch is in large number of H with the general secretary.