1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 21,863,550 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from January 1, 2016 to February 8, 2018.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed as the same.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff was a partner of the Defendant Corporation, a patent firm, from the end of 2011.

B. On December 29, 2014, the Plaintiff withdrawn from a member of the Defendant Corporation and entered into a contract for termination of the business with the Defendant Corporation as follows (hereinafter “instant termination contract”).

Article 1 (Duties of Defendant Corporation) (1) The Defendant corporation shall be paid KRW 75 million to the Plaintiff in return for the share, but the payment shall be made in installments of KRW 30 million on February 1, 2015, KRW 25 million on March 1, 2015, KRW 25 million on March 1, 2015, and KRW 20 million on April 1, 2015.

Article 2 (Duty of Plaintiff) Although the Plaintiff did not accept all cases (application, appraisal, investigation, etc.) of a customer in a transaction with the Defendant corporation, the Plaintiff is entitled to receive counseling, application, appraisal, etc. for the commencement of the case from January 1, 2016.

Article 3 (Penalties) (1) Where a defendant corporation fails to comply with the payment deadline, 24% per annum shall be paid for interest in arrears.

(2) Where a plaintiff has accepted a case in violation of Article 2, he/she shall pay twice the fee to the defendant corporation, and the period of restriction on acceptance shall be extended by one year.

C. Of the shares stipulated in the instant termination contract, the Defendant Company paid to the Plaintiff KRW 30 million on February 3, 2015, KRW 10 million on June 23, 2015, and KRW 15 million on December 31, 2015, respectively, and did not pay the remainder of the shares and interest for delay.

On the other hand, C, the former business partner of the defendant corporation, was in charge of the defendant after the plaintiff became a member of the defendant corporation, and the plaintiff was supported by C’s appointment announcement around February 2015, under which the termination contract of this case was agreed to limit the acceptance of the case against the existing business partner.

Since then, although the plaintiff was appointed as multiple patent agents together with the defendant corporation, as the defendant corporation went against the defendant corporation, the plaintiff presented to the defendant corporation a reduction of KRW 20 million out of the share amount agreed upon in the termination contract of this case in return for the plaintiff's acceptance of case C. Accordingly, the defendant corporation is more than the plaintiff's acceptance for three months.