1. An appeal as to the principal lawsuit and counterclaim by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and incidental appeal as to the counterclaim by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. The grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act citing the judgment of the court of first instance

However, as follows, part of the judgment of the first instance is dismissed, and the judgment on the allegations made by the plaintiff and the defendant in this court is added.

2. As to the part of the first instance judgment, the defendant's assertion that "the defendant's assertion that "the plaintiff's sale exceeds 52,000 won" in the second instance judgment's statement "the defendant's sale in Korea" in the second instance judgment's statement "the defendant's sale in Korea" in the second half of six pages "the defendant's sale in Korea" in the second instance judgment's statement "the defendant's sale in Korea" in the third instance judgment's 11, and "the defendant's argument that exceeds 52,000 won" in the third instance judgment's statement "the plaintiff's assertion that exceeds 52,000 dollars" in the first instance judgment's statement.

3. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion as to whether the Defendant’s nonperformance (i) consistently promised to sell the entire “E products” to the Plaintiff after the first contract. The Defendant, despite being aware that the Plaintiff infringed the Plaintiff’s exclusive right to sell, infringed the Plaintiff’s exclusive right to sell the products by actively recognizing the Plaintiff’s exclusive right to sell or neglecting his/her selling act. The specific reasons are as follows: ① the Defendant entered into the first contract with the Plaintiff on July 201, and entered into a distribution sales contract with the I around October 201 (the first breach of the contract) with the Plaintiff (the first breach of the contract) with the Plaintiff on November 1, 201, and the Defendant again entered into a supply contract with the I and the “K” brand (the first breach of the contract) with the Plaintiff on November 1, 2012 (the first and second breach of the contract). ③ The Defendant, even after having been aware of the Plaintiff’s exclusive right to sell the products, may continue to sell the products online (the second to third to third to 1301).