The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

The plaintiff.

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of Gap evidence No. 6-1 to 4, Gap evidence No. 11-1 to 5, Eul evidence No. 11, and Eul evidence No. 1, and there are no counter-proofs.

The plaintiff is a business operator of BanVN for the purpose of selling and managing credit card terminals, and the defendant is a person who operates the BanV department.

B. On October 2, 2014, the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with a credit card device and signature tag (hereinafter “instant device, etc.”) to the Defendant, and the Defendant sought approval for the transaction of the credit card using the instant device, etc., received a service from the Defendant to deposit the credit sales price into the Defendant’s account, and entered into a contract for the use of the Ban (VN) service that the Defendant would pay monthly management fees to the Plaintiff.

C. On October 15, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant changed the type of the instant device, etc., and re-established a contract for a service-based contract.

On June 2, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant had the same type of the instant device, but changed the number of the device to a different device, and re-established a contract for a service contract (VN) (hereinafter “instant contract”).

E. On September 20, 2017, the Defendant suspended the business of KRW C in general, and suspended the business of KRW C in other places on December 18, 2017, without using the instant terminal, etc. provided by the Plaintiff, using another device. For the foregoing reason, the Plaintiff terminated the contract for the use of the broadband (VN) service concluded with the Defendant on September 25, 2017.

F. The terms and conditions of the instant contract include the following:

1) For 60 months, the period of mandatory contract under Article 3, the Plaintiff should use broadband services and lease equipment provided by the Plaintiff. 2) Article 6(1) of the same Act is in violation of Article 3.