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 value-added network provider providing credit card payment approval services, etc. by utilizing a communications network between a credit card company and a credit card merchant after concluding a service contract with a credit card company and a credit card merchant (hereinafter “ordinary VN company”).

The Plaintiff is the Defendant’s agency that solicits a franchise store to be provided with the credit card payment approval service by the Defendant (hereinafter “user”) and is a merchant solicitor (agency) in charge of installing and maintaining the terminal, etc. supplied by the Defendant to the franchise store and collecting the credit card approval slip kept in the franchise store.

B. On December 6, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a long-term product lending contract and subsidiary agreement with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant product lending contract”) and a long-term product lending contract under which the Defendant provides “products of the Defendant’s terminal, etc.” under an agency contract entered into between the Defendant and the Defendant is to be leased with the following content (hereinafter “instant product lending contract”).

AB concluded the agreement.

- Products means equipment such as terminals, POS, digital signature tags supplied by the Defendant.

- The term of a long-term lending contract for the products that the Defendant has lent to the Plaintiff shall be separately stipulated in the “Agreement annexed to the Long-Term lending Contract” that was concluded separately under this contract, and the lending relationship for the “leased products” shall continue to be maintained for two years after the expiration of the lending contract term.

Provided, That the term "product maintenance period" does not apply to the "number of agreed terms" and "the imposition of penalty" prescribed separately in the "Agreement annexed to the Long-term Lending Contract".

- The plaintiff should have more than the agreed number of cases stipulated in the agreement annexed to the long-term lending contract at a franchise store in which products borrowed from the defendant were installed, and the same shall apply when the number of cases falls short of the agreed number.