1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 33 million and the amount calculated by 6% per annum from January 1, 2015 to August 11, 2016.

1. Determination on the remaining claims for payment

A. A. On September 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendants (the name prior to the change of the case that was collected by the Defendant Co., Ltd.) entered into a contract for the production of audio program “SUPPPER SAR-V (hereinafter “instant program”) to produce and supply the program to the Defendants (hereinafter “instant outsourcing contract”).

(2) According to the outsourcing agreement of this case, the Plaintiff produced and supplied each of the films in Korea (8-14), among the instant programs, 19 billion won in total, 30 million won in the production cost of the instant program, 60 minutes of the production cost of the instant program, and 30 minutes of the production cost of the program to be broadcasted in Vietnam, and 30 minutes of the production cost of the program to be broadcasted in Vietnam, and 10 days of the production cost of the Internet broadcast, and the films in Korea (8-14 times) shall be delivered until the program does not interfere with Vietnam’s broadcast, until July 31, 2014, and each of the original materials recorded in the production process of the instant program were sent to the Defendants at the time of termination of the agreement. On the other hand, 30 million won in remainder of the production cost is paid to the Defendants within 10 days of the production cost of the instant program and within 10 days of the broadcast of the Republic of Korea.

(3) The Plaintiff produced and supplied photographs in Korea, and received KRW 270 million out of the production cost, but supplied 60 minutes of the production cost in excess of the delivery period (as of July 31, 2014) (as of July 31, 2014), and supplied them on October 29, 2014.

The said documentary was scheduled to be aired in SBS around 02:0 on November 6, 2014. However, on the ground that the number of times it was exposed from the phone page of the instant program falls short of the number of times, the Plaintiff notified the Plaintiff of the broadcast price and did not broadcast the Plaintiff on the said day.

(4) Meanwhile, around September 30, 2014, the Plaintiff prepared 30 minutes of documentary evidence against the Defendant’s side.