1. The appeal against the counterclaim by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are borne by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. In the first instance trial, the Plaintiff filed a counterclaim seeking payment of brokerage commission, and the Defendant filed a counterclaim seeking damages for infringement of the exclusive sales right, and the claim was accepted and the counterclaim was dismissed.

It is evident that only the defendant has filed an appeal against a counterclaim.

Therefore, only the counterclaim claim of this case is subject to the judgment of the court, and it is judged on it.

2. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the argument of the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and decision of the court of first instance are justified even if the evidence submitted to the court of first instance was presented to this court.

The reasoning for the court's explanation of this case is as follows: "The defendant, accordingly, entered into an exclusive sales contract with the Australia company by October 2017, which is entitled to exclusive sales rights for the products of Australia from the date of the same day; " November 10, 201" in the third part of the same case as " November 10, 201"; and the fifth part of the judgment of 3.0 of the fifth part is the same as the reasoning for the judgment of the first instance except for the following 2. Thus, it shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. The fact that the Defendant, as a result of the determination on the counterclaim, was granted the exclusive right to sell the product from Australia Company until October 2017, is recognized as above. The Plaintiff supplied the product to I on April 2017, and the fact that I sold the product at J on April 16, 2017 is no dispute between the parties.

However, since the above exclusive sales authority was granted to the defendant by the Australia company, the plaintiff is not obligated to guarantee the defendant's exclusive sales right as a party to the contract for exclusive sales, but if the plaintiff infringed the defendant's claim as a third party, the tort can be established.

In general,