1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff)’s weekly newspaper business, title C, and registration number D, against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Upon the Plaintiff’s request, the Defendant agreed to register the publisher and editor C (special weekly newspapers, online newspapers, monthly magazines 3; hereinafter the same shall apply) operated by the Plaintiff in the name of the Defendant. On February 24, 2015, the publisher and editor had completed the registration procedure for changing the name of the Defendant in the previous G, and on February 28, 2015, the Defendant opened the deposit account in the Defendant’s name (hereinafter “instant account”) in the name of the Defendant, which is necessary for the news business, and issued passbooks, seals and seals to the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendant became aware of the Plaintiff through the introduction of Nonparty H, and served as a director general of the editing bureau of the instant newspaper from February 2014 to December, 12, and retired from office, and thereafter, the Defendant registered the name of the instant newspaper as the Defendant and resumed the editing work again.

C. Around May 2015, the Defendant suspended editing work on the grounds that the Defendant would not pay any remuneration to the Defendant, despite the receipt of advertising expenses due to the operation of the instant newspaper, and changed the password of the instant account, and lost the check card.

The Defendant demanded the Plaintiff to transfer the name of the instant newspaper to the former. On July 31, 2015, the Defendant reported the closure of business regarding the instant newspaper registered under the name of the Defendant, and around November 9, 2015, the balance of KRW 9,282,69 remains in the instant account around November 9, 2015, which was after the closure of business.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 6, 7 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence 8, 11, witness H's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The defendant does not dispute that the defendant is obligated to return the name of the publisher and editor of the newspaper of this case to the defendant in determining the cause of the claim, and that the amount deposited in the account of this case should be returned to the plaintiff as it keeps the proceeds of the newspaper of this case. Thus, the defendant does not dispute that the defendant should return it to the plaintiff.