1. The Defendant’s KRW 32,657,262 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 6% from November 4, 2016 to November 6, 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. Around December 2015, the Plaintiff, a stock company, engaged in a DNA franchise business, entered into a franchise agreement with the Defendant as a franchisor, a franchise agreement with the Defendant as a franchisee of a store located in Gangnam-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant franchise store”) and a contract with the Plaintiff to entrust the instant franchise store with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. From January 2016, the Plaintiff

3. Until April 3, 200, the Defendant received a total of KRW 319,700,000 from the Defendant, and completed the preparation for the interior and opening of the instant franchise store, and thereafter, the instant franchise store was operated. The Defendant refused to supply goods from the Plaintiff and expressed his intention to terminate the consignment management, and then continued to operate the instant franchise store as the Plaintiff’s trade name at the instant franchise store as before, and thereafter, to operate the instant franchise store as of November 4, 2016, by converting the trade name “E” from November 4, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3-1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On or around December 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a franchise agreement with the Defendant on the instant franchise store and the instant franchise store operation pursuant to the standard franchise agreement with the Plaintiff, and subsequently, concluded a franchise agreement with the Defendant on consignment to the Plaintiff. Not only the conclusion of a written contract with regard thereto, but also the Defendant’s payment of franchise fees, interior expenses, personnel expenses, royalties, and goods supply fees that the Defendant is obliged to perform under the said agreement, and the Plaintiff’s trade name, “D”, which unfairly terminates the said agreement after the end of August 2016, and the Plaintiff’s continued to run the business by continuously using the Plaintiff’s trademark, and the Plaintiff’s trade name on November 4, 2016, was changed to “E” and continues to run the same business as the previous franchise

Therefore, the Defendant: (a) the Plaintiff; (b) the franchise fee of KRW 10,00,00; and (c) the amount of KRW 60,715,084, including the amount of goods supplied, = KRW 23,970,000, which is the human cost of KRW 23,970,000, which is the labor cost of June 2016.