The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the lower court determined that the Plaintiff acquired the right to impose and collect management fees from that time on September 4, 2013 as the superstore manager of the shopping mall of this case, on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

Examining the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations, but did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by violating the rules of evidence.

2. On the ground of appeal No. 2, the lower court determined that it was based on the store management regulation that the sales of a mixed sales store by F Co., Ltd. on the fiveth floor of the shopping mall in this case, different from the type of business designated in the sales contract, could not be said to have any error.

Examining the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on Article 12 (4) of the Distribution Industry Development Act or by misapprehending facts, etc. affecting the conclusion

The Supreme Court precedents cited in the grounds of appeal are different from this case and are not appropriate to be invoked in this case.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.