1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the defendant's argument in the trial of the court of the first instance, and the reasoning of the judgment is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of the first instance. Thus, this is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the deposit should be deducted, as the Defendant deposited 20% of the Defendant’s allowances from May 1, 2014, and 30% from December 2014, in preparation for the amount of recovery, etc. that may occur under the instant insurance solicitor commission contract.

The Defendant did not dispute the Plaintiff in cash, including KRW 5.79 million around June 2014, KRW 4.21 million around July 2014, KRW 12.66 million around March 2015, and KRW 1,2.66 million around March 2015. However, according to the evidence adopted earlier, the fact that the above deposit was settled at around November 2015, and was already reflected in the calculation of the refund amount of KRW 350,93,684 as seen earlier, and there is a lack to recognize the existence of the amount additionally deposited by the Defendant in addition to the above amount, and there is no other evidence to prove it otherwise. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.