1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who operated an entertainment establishment (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) under the trade name “D” in Busan Maritime Daegu C, and the Defendant is a “mast” in charge of attracting customers, and E is a “member” in charge of managing entertainment establishments.

B. The Defendant received the service fees from customers (hereinafter “service fees”) and paid them in cash directly to the members of the community, and when the Plaintiff deposits to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff distributed them to the members of the community.

C. The Defendant worked at the Plaintiff’s establishment from around 208 to December 8, 2012.

On January 3, 2013, the Defendant deposited KRW 5,500,000 to the F’s account in the name of the Plaintiff’s management.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 4, 5 evidence, Eul 7 evidence (including branch numbers if there are branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), each witness E and G of the party hearing, the result of the party hearing's questioning, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that, at the time of the defendant's delivery of the plaintiff's business establishment, the plaintiff paid service fees of KRW 17.8 million to members on behalf of the defendant, the defendant is obligated to pay the above amount to the plaintiff.

The fact that the plaintiff's business establishment was about KRW 15,50,000 at the time of the establishment is the defendant, but it is difficult to believe that some of the testimony of the witness G of the political party witness G is consistent with the plaintiff's argument that additional settlement amount is to be paid KRW 2,30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the settlement amount of KRW 15.5 million and delay damages.

3. On January 3, 2013, the Defendant rendered a judgment on the Defendant’s defense of repayment, with the F account managed by the Plaintiff, KRW 500,000.