1. The part of the first instance judgment against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) regarding the conjunctive claim shall be revoked.

Basic Facts

From June 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant operated a mutual club called “D” (hereinafter “instant club”) on the eightth floor of Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu Seoul building as its club business.

(2) The plaintiff and the defendant asserted that the plaintiff and the defendant set up a written answer on March 4, 2016 on the date of the first instance trial to the effect that the plaintiff and the defendant set up a business partnership agreement on the joint operation of the club of this case on the following grounds: (a) since they acknowledged that the plaintiff and the defendant operated the club of this case as a business partnership since they operated the club of this case from 2013 to 2013, the plaintiff and the defendant set up a written answer on the date of the first instance trial on the premise that they were in a business partnership relationship; and (b) they asserted that the plaintiff and the defendant's argument on the operation of the club of this case from October 31, 2018 as stated on the date of the seventh instance trial to revoke the argument on the operation of the club of this case. However, there is no evidence to prove that the confession of the plaintiff and the defendant is against the truth and due to mistake; (c) the content of the agreement is 50% shares in each of the plaintiff and the defendant's profits and expenses in each of this case.

The Plaintiff and the Defendant continued to operate the instant club prior to its operation. From March 2016, 2016, the instant club was closed on May 31, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 27 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the summary of the argument of the parties to the whole purport of the pleadings, the plaintiff and the defendant operated the instant club as a partnership. Since the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant terminated by closing the instant club on May 31, 2016, the defendant received in excess of the current union's residual property 441,868,337 won and the defendant received in excess of the profits of the instant club, the sum of 261,231,395 won.