1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 10,005,50 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and the amount from August 28, 2014 to April 8, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation whose main business is to import and sell alcoholic beverages in Korea, and the Defendant is an employee who entered the Plaintiff Company in around 2006 and served for eight years in the Plaintiff’s lot department C store, etc., and retired from office around May 15, 2013.

B. Until November 2012, Plaintiff Company’s entertainment department C sales stores (hereinafter “instant sales stores”) supplied alcoholic beverages to the instant department stores by the Plaintiff, and the sales stores are operated in the form of direct operation by the instant department stores. The instant sales stores were converted into lease stores thereafter.

C. From August 1, 2012 to September 30, 2012, when the store of this case was operated as a direct payment store, the Defendant did not obtain the Plaintiff’s permission and sold alcoholic beverages in a lot store at a discounted price, and the Plaintiff demanded the employees, including the Defendant, etc., to submit a horsebook and a letter (hereinafter “the horsebook, etc.”), and the main purpose of which is as follows.

For the difference in August 2012: 3,873,319 won in September 2012: 1,608,523 won in total: the defendant shall be liable for any loss incurred by the difference in the purchase price of KRW 5,481,842, but the plaintiff company shall be exempted from the defendant.

Provided, That if any part of the sale at the price without permission is repeated at the later time, it shall be compensated retroactively;

This mistake occurred in the desire to increase sales.

In the future, purchase and sale shall be made with a new cost.

After the store of this case was converted into a leased store, a lot department C opened a discount store on April 2013. At that time, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to submit to the Defendant the documents that the Plaintiff recognized the Defendant to be erroneous, as a title of cooperation, on the ground that the Defendant sold alcoholic beverages at a discounted price, disregarding the Plaintiff’s company’s guidelines and selling alcoholic beverages at a discounted price. The Plaintiff submitted them on May 16, 2013.