1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s principal claim and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim claim against B are dismissed, respectively.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. Since the establishment of Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”) on January 2008, Defendant C operated the Defendant Co., Ltd as the representative director.

B. From July 2010, the Plaintiff agreed to conduct the business with Defendant C, paid KRW 24,50,000 to Defendant C, and acquired shares of the Defendant Company 4,900 (49% of shares). On March 21, 2011, the Plaintiff assumed office as an internal director of the Defendant Company.

C. After that, the Plaintiff retired from the Plaintiff Company, and the Defendant Company registry entered that the Defendant Company was dismissed on February 13, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant Company and the Defendant Company D (hereinafter “D”)

(3) The agency contract is based on the agreement between the Plaintiff or the Defendant and the agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s agent’s total of KRW 24,180,200 and the agent’s agent’s agent’s material

However, the Defendant Company unilaterally renewed the existing agency contract with the Plaintiff and disposed of materials stored in each of the above logistics warehouses without any agreement on all the matters following the termination of the agency contract. Thus, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 22,090,100,000, the sum of KRW 12,090,000 equivalent to the above security deposit and KRW 12,090,100 due to the violation of the contract in this case, and KRW 22,09,090,100 as the disposal price of materials. 2) As the Plaintiff retires from the Defendant Company, the Defendant Company acquired the Plaintiff’s shares in the Defendant Company on March 21, 2012, and thus the Defendant Company is obligated to return KRW 24,50,000,000, which was invested by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff.

B. The Plaintiff’s assertion regarding the instant agreement is insufficient to be recognized solely on the basis of the written evidence No. 2, No. 2, and No. 6.