1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 10, 2006, the Plaintiff entered into a sales store contract based on the franchise business method with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”). The instant contract was renewed on the basis of mutual trust relationship with each other under the same conditions, and its contract period was extended until October 9, 2013.

(1) Where objective circumstances arise that make it difficult to achieve the purpose of the instant contract, such as sales progress, etc., the Plaintiff or the Defendant may terminate the instant contract, and where the contract is terminated for such reasons, the Plaintiff or the Defendant must notify the other party in writing three months prior to the termination.

(Article 17(1) and (2)(2)(2) If either party causes damage to the other party in violation of the preceding paragraph, one party may claim compensation for such damage to the other party (Article 17(3)). In such a case, the amount of damages shall be calculated as “the net profit (the average net profit during the business period, if there is no business performance in the preceding year) of the plaintiff or the defendant for the same period as the number of days of damage (three months after the arrival of documents - the

(Article 17 (4) (3) If the other party has suffered damages in violation of the contract of this case, the plaintiff or defendant may claim damages against the other party.

(4) The term of validity of the contract of this case is from October 10, 2006 to October 9, 2008. However, if the plaintiff or defendant does not notify in writing the other party of the intent to renew the contract due to the termination of the contract or the modification of the terms of the contract three months prior to the expiration date, the contract of this case is extended for one year under the same conditions as the transfer.

(Article 19, Paragraph 1, the main sentence of Paragraph 2). (b)

Around January 2009, the Defendant separately disbursed part of the first floor of the Seoul Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ground C Building from B to the large amount of premium, and aims to sell the goods stipulated in the contract of this case.