beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant is a company engaged in the original manufacture, export and import business, and the manufacturing business of subsidiary materials for clothing (hereinafter “Defendant company”), and the Plaintiff worked in the Defendant company from the second half of 2002 and retired from office around October 2009.
B. The Plaintiff served in the “C” company from November 2009 to April 2010, and returned to the Defendant company on May 1, 2010.
C. From December 10, 2010 to December 10, 2010, the Plaintiff received benefits of KRW 5 million each month in the form of business income, not earned income, from the Defendant Company, and received the first benefit after re-admission, which was paid at KRW 3.5 million on November 10, 2010.
Around April 2014, the Defendant Company retired from office on May 1, 2014. From May 1, 2014 to April 30, 2016, the term of lease was set at KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 2 million, and the Defendant Company started to engage in the management services, manufacturing, and wholesale business of the garment House.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 3, 5, 11, 12, Eul No. 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. On April 2010, D, the representative of the defendant company, recommended the plaintiff to re-enter the defendant company into the defendant company by free trade, and suggested that "the plaintiff will pay the plaintiff the total amount of the business profit accrued to the defendant company for the business including not only the case where the plaintiff receives the orders from the new company, but also the case where the defendant company receives the orders from the company already engaged in the transactions."
The Plaintiff, which received this, entered into an agreement with the Defendant Company on the same content (hereinafter referred to as the “instant agreement”), and re-enters the Defendant Company as a franchise.
The business that the Plaintiff re-entered the Defendant Company from May 1, 2010 to the end of April 2014.