1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance (excluding the part invalidated by the reduction of claim) shall be revoked.

1. In the first instance court within the scope of this court’s adjudication, the Plaintiff filed a claim for damages due to the failure to exempt the Plaintiff from the service fees and the Plaintiff’s sales reduction with respect to the Defendant, and the first instance court rendered a judgment dismissing the remainder of the claims.

As to the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, the defendant appealed to the part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance, and the plaintiff partially reduced the defendant's claim in the judgment prior to remand, and the judgment prior to remand was dismissed in entirety by both the plaintiff and the defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff and the defendant appealed against each part of the judgment of the court prior to remand. The Supreme Court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal and reversed the part against the defendant in the judgment prior to remand and remanded.

Therefore, since the part against the plaintiff in the judgment before remanding is separately determined, the subject of the judgment by the court of the trial after remanding is limited to the part of the claim for damages due to the failure to exempt the raling service fees, which is the part destroyed by the judgment of the court of the trial after remanding.

2. Basic facts

A. B was in office as a director from around 2009 to May 201, 201, and was in general in charge of the Plaintiff’s business on behalf of the representative director from May 201 to March 2012. From April 2012 to November 2012, B performed overall control over the Plaintiff’s business while holding office as the representative director.

The defendant is a person who is or was an actual owner and operator of the J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “J”) holding G, H, I, etc., a web sub-contractor.

B. On April 7, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with J for the provision of real-time multimedia content monitoring services using content-based search technology (hereinafter “instant contract”) and completed the said contract upon the expiration of the period.