1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company running the business of selling insurance products by an insurance company, such as a future life insurance company (hereinafter “Smi”) and the Defendant was working as an insurance solicitor from May 201 to December 2012 at the Plaintiff’s B branch (the change to B branch around February 2012) (the change to B branch office around February 2012).

B. On May 3, 2011, the Defendant drafted an agreement stating that “The Plaintiff received KRW 500,000,000, and agreed that “The Plaintiff shall work and work normally for at least three years from the date of commission (based on the date of commission) and return the said money in the event of the breach of the agreement” (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

C. From February 2011 to July 201, the Plaintiff granted a total of KRW 3 million to the Defendant over several times.

On August 22, 2011, the defendant was registered as an insurance employee of the future set of insurance on August 22, 201, and the above registration was cancelled on December 14, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) paid KRW 3,00,000 to the Defendant on condition that the Defendant worked for the Plaintiff company for more than three years. Since the Defendant retired before the lapse of three years from the date of entry, the Defendant is obligated to return KRW 3,000,000 to the Plaintiff pursuant to the instant agreement. (2) Defendant (i) the above KRW 3,000,000 to compensate the Plaintiff for damages that the Defendant had been enrolled in the Plaintiff company and could not receive allowances from the company that was enrolled in the company, and thus, the Defendant did not have any obligation to return them on the ground that the Defendant retired before the lapse of three years from the date of entry.

② At the time of February 2012, the Plaintiff received KRW 50 million from C while changing C and B, which were the head of the Plaintiff’s B, into the form of B and received KRW 50 million from C. The said amount was paid to the employees who worked for the Defendant and other B.