1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. On April 17, 2015, the head of Seo-gu Daejeon District Office received on April 17, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. From around 2001 to April 14, 2015, the Defendant served as the managing director of the Plaintiff Union.

B. On April 14, 2015, the Plaintiff Union drafted a recommendation agency agreement with the Defendant as follows:

(hereinafter referred to as “instant recommendation agency arrangement”). Terms and conditions of the recommendation agency

1. Voluntary resignations: 50,000,000 won (in response to the amount of salaries for the remaining period);

2. Subsequent to the Defendant’s obligation to transfer an association vehicle (D) free of charge, the Defendant is a clerical error in the name of the Plaintiff Association (hereinafter “F Association”) act and the name E Association “F Association”.

hereinafter referred to as "commercial partnership"

(c) A written statement of non-participation in the process of the establishment and implementation of the Plaintiff’s association shall be submitted to the Plaintiff on the same day. The Defendant, on the same day, submitted the following certificates to the Plaintiff. The Defendant later does not actively intervene in the establishment of the Plaintiff’s association being promoted by Daejeon and Sejong Industries as of February 2, 2015. The Defendant shall not be re-employed until the end of 2015. D. The Plaintiff Union paid KRW 50,000,000 to the Defendant pursuant to the instant recommendation resignation agreement and on May 17, 2015 (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).

(A) India and transferred its title. [Grounds for recognition] Fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4 (Evidence A(Evidence 2) is the same as evidence B(Evidence A 2).

- The purport of the whole pleadings

2. Terms and conditions of the instant recommendation agency agreement

A. In regard to the assertion by the parties, the Plaintiff Union and the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff Union and the Defendant entered into a single contract with the obligation of the Plaintiff Union and the Defendant, the Defendant submitted the letter of commitment in accordance with the instant recommendation agency agreement, and even if the content of the letter of commitment was violated, the Plaintiff Union cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim, as it did not put any disadvantage to the Plaintiff Union.

B. As seen earlier, the instant case is determined.