1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a corporation that operates a private teaching institute, Internet education, and learning business, and operates a private teaching institute called “D” on the third floor, Dongjak-gu, Seoul, and the Plaintiff is an instructor of a private teaching institute who teaches the above private teaching institute as an English instructor.

B. From January 1, 2014 to December 30, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the provision of lectures/public official English subjects, including basic books, and video content, derived from the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute lecture (hereinafter “instant lecture contract”) with the Plaintiff from January 1, 2014, to December 30, 2016.

C. According to the instant contract, the Defendant provided the Plaintiff with the “General Police Staff” class. However, as the team leader of the Defendant’s “D’s “General Police Staff group” lecture, the Plaintiff, who is in charge of the Criminal Procedure Act and the investigation lecture, was in charge of the Plaintiff’s taking charge of the “General Police Staff group,” the Plaintiff was in charge of the English lecture for the subjects of the public official examination in general service rather than the “General Police Staff group” lecture operated by the Defendant.

From April 1, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant from April 1, 2014 to March 31, 2017, referred to as “the content provision contract of this case” with the content provision providing the Plaintiff’s content photographing the contents of the Plaintiff’s lecture at the Defendant’s private teaching institute, and the derivative copyrighted works related thereto, provided by the Plaintiff, to operate online educational services.

A) The Plaintiff entered into a contract, and the Plaintiff provided online education services from “F” operated by the Plaintiff. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in Gap Nos. 1 through 3 and Eul No. 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant bears the duty to provide the Plaintiff with an opportunity to teach the “General Police Officers”.