1. On December 8, 2016, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 17,740,00 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and the Plaintiff’s payment from February 7, 2017 to December 8, 2016.

The main lawsuit and counterclaim are also examined.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) operated a private teaching institute with strong high school curriculum, etc.; (b) appointed the Defendant as a Korean language instructor of the said private teaching institute operated by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s private teaching institute”); (c) allocated the amount excluding income tax, credit card fee, etc. (hereinafter “income”) from the tuition fees paid by the students according to a certain ratio; (d) the Defendant made an oral contract with the Plaintiff as to lectures and investment contracts (hereinafter “instant contract”); and (e) paid KRW 15,00,000 to the Plaintiff at the time of the termination of the contract. At that time, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the said investment amount of KRW 15,00,000.

B. On March 6, 2016, the Defendant sent a text message stating that the instant contract will be terminated to the Plaintiff, and around that time, Mapo-gu established and operated a private teaching institute with the trade name “E” in Mapo-gu.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

가. 원고 주장의 요지 피고는 자신의 학력과 관련하여 서강대학교를 졸업하였다고 허위의 사실을 말하여 원고를 기망하였고, 자기 명의로 별도의 학원을 개원하여 원고 학원의 수강생들을 자기 학원으로 빼돌리거나 원고 학원에서 수강생을 가르치면서 그 수강료를 피고가 직접 받아 가로챘으며, 원고 학원의 수강생과 학부모들에게 마치 자신이 피해자인 것처럼 허위사실을 유포하였는바, 이는 형법상 사기, 업무상 배임에 해당하고 상법상 경업금지 및 민법상 신의성실의 원칙에 반하는 불법행위이다.

Due to the above tort, 41 students retired from the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute from October 1, 2015 to March 2016, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant were to divide 50% tuition fees.