beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claim that the court changed in exchange are all dismissed.
2. The total cost of the lawsuit.
Reasons
1. Each description of evidence No. 2 through 5, 12, 14, 19, 22, 30, and Eul evidence No. 1 (including branch numbers if there are branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), part of witness I's testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings;
A. Party 1) The Plaintiff graduated from the department of dance at Lhee University. While operating “C” as a performance planning company, the Plaintiff planned and performed various performances, such as Arails, etc. around August 2008. 2) The Defendant is operating a private teaching institute with a mutual name called “E” (hereinafter “E”) while serving as a performance planning company.
B. The Plaintiff’s production and performance (1) around August 201, 201, the Plaintiff’s production and performance of the following works: (a) the Plaintiff’s production and performance of the following works: (b) the Plaintiff’s production and performance of the following works: (c) the Plaintiff’s production and performance of the following works: (d) the Plaintiff’s production and performance of the instant work of “G,”
(2) Around February 4, 2012, the Defendant: (a) sought an art instruction for the No. 1 of this case; and (b) the Defendant, from March 2012, requested an art instruction for the performance of the No. 1 of this case by taking charge of the security of the No. 1 of this case’s work and guiding dances; and (c) subsequently, on May 4, 2012, the Plaintiff publicly performed the No. 1 of this case’s work for the first time, and then, (d) indicated the Plaintiff as the art supervision of the No. 1 of this case’s work, and (e) indicated the Defendant as the Defendant.
3) Meanwhile, at around April 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) during the production process of the first relic works of this case for the Defendant, the production process of the relic works of the title “F” (hereinafter “the relic works of this case”); and (b) “the relics of this case” refers to the first relics of the instant relics; and (c) “the relics of the relics of this case.”
(4) On June 28, 2012, the Plaintiff, while performing for the first time the instant relic works on the first time on June 28, 2012, proposed that the Plaintiff be the representative of the Plaintiff, the artistic director, and the director of the art group.