1. The Defendant’s KRW 78,153,00 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from September 1, 2017 to August 31, 2018, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a partnership agreement, etc.) around April 2017, 201, “Cstore” (hereinafter “instant restaurant”).

In order to operate the restaurant jointly, the overall operation of the restaurant of this case shall be carried out by the defendant, and the general operation of the restaurant of this case shall be 50:50 each, with an investment of 50:50 each, with an interest of 50%, and the profits shall also be distributed to 50:50 each (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

(2) Under the instant agreement, the Plaintiff paid KRW 90,000,000 to the Defendant in total between April 27, 2017 and May 11, 2017.

3) On May 8, 2017, the Defendant is the second floor among the D-Ground buildings in Yong-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do (hereinafter “instant building”).

(B) A lease deposit of KRW 30,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,600,000, and the lease term of KRW 50,000,000 from May 10, 2017 to May 9, 2019, paid KRW 50,000 to the head office “E” and began to operate the instant restaurant in the instant building around June 2017. (b) The Plaintiff expressed his intention to withdraw from the business relationship with the Defendant around August 2017, which caused disputes with the Defendant as a result of the distribution of profits, and thereafter, the Defendant continued to operate the instant restaurant on his/her own. [In the absence of dispute, each entry of KRW 1-3, the purport of the entire pleadings, and the purport of the entire pleadings.]

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff and the Defendant formed a partnership by entering into the instant partnership agreement to run a joint business, and the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that he would withdraw from the partnership around August 2017. As such, the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s partnership relationship terminated on or around August 2017. 2) As to this, the Defendant, after entering into the instant partnership agreement, operated the instant restaurant without the Plaintiff’s aid, making it difficult for the Defendant to run the instant restaurant without the Plaintiff’s aid, thereby causing a significant loss. The Plaintiff’s unilateral withdrawal is too harsh for the Defendant to recognize the Plaintiff’s unilateral withdrawal. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s withdrawal cannot be acknowledged.