1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) is about 30,000.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around March 2014, the Defendant, a sales agent of KT, entered into a contract on entrustment of business affairs (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Plaintiff and the Defendant, providing the Plaintiff with cellular phone free of charge, selling it to the Plaintiff and selling it to the Plaintiff and selling it to the Plaintiff.

B. On January 9, 2015, while the Plaintiff continued to engage in transactions under the instant contract with the Defendant, the Plaintiff entered into a guarantee insurance contract with the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. and the Defendant to pay insurance money in accordance with the instant contract (a guarantee amount: KRW 30 million, the insured: the Defendant’s representative, the Defendant’s representative from January 9, 2015 to January 8, 2016) (hereinafter “instant guarantee insurance contract”), and submitted the insurance policy to the Defendant.

C. The Defendant received the above insurance policy from the Plaintiff and transferred the Plaintiff’s bank account KRW 5 million on January 9, 2015, KRW 25 million on the 15th day of the same month, and KRW 30 million on the aggregate (hereinafter “instant KRW 30 million”).

around October 1, 2015, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to return to the Plaintiff since five mobile phone devices were not verified while the Defendant discovered the current status of the mobile phone period entrusted to the Plaintiff at the Plaintiff’s store, but the Plaintiff refused such request.

6. The Plaintiff filed a complaint with embezzlement, and on the 13th of the same month claimed insurance money under the instant guarantee insurance contract, and at that time notified the termination of the instant contract.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff 30 million won of this case is not the sales commission that the plaintiff received from the defendant, but the defendant's employee D, E.