1. Of the parts concerning the counterclaim against the judgment of the court of first instance, the following amounts shall be the amount ordered to be paid:

1. The court of first instance accepted the plaintiff's conjunctive main claim, and dismissed the plaintiff's main main claim and the defendant's counterclaim respectively.

However, since only the Defendant appealed on the part of the counterclaim claim (the Defendant appealed on all the part concerning the principal lawsuit and counterclaim of the first instance judgment, but voluntarily withdrawn the appeal on the part concerning the principal lawsuit of the first instance judgment on the date for preparatory pleading of the first instance judgment on the date for preparatory pleading of the third instance), the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the part concerning the counterclaim claim.

2. Basic facts

A. On December 2013, the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and E (hereinafter referred to as “original Defendant, etc.”) agreed to jointly operate mobile phone sales stores by investing a total of KRW 90 million in each of KRW 30 million around December 2013.

(hereinafter “instant trade agreement”). On the other hand, E invested 30 million won as stipulated in the instant trade agreement.

(A) As seen earlier, there is a dispute as to the amount of investment made by the plaintiff and the defendant respectively.

B. On December 3, 2013, pursuant to the instant trade agreement, the Defendant, etc. leased the first floor of the building located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju as KRW 40,000,000 from the Plaintiff’s name, and completed the business registration and artificial test construction under the Plaintiff’s name and opened the mobile phone sales store (hereinafter “instant sales store”) with the trade name “D” at the said place on December 12, 2013.

C. In the case of the sales store of this case, when purchasing cell phoness, refund a certain amount of money to the customer who subscribed to the communications company (hereinafter “cafination”), and then gain profits by receiving the money from the communications company (the amount higher than the above page), and the money received from the communications company was deposited into the Plaintiff’s account.

The sales store of this case was reported on June 30, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 13, Eul.