1. Compulsory execution based on the Defendant’s decision on performance recommendation against the Plaintiff on March 27, 2018, 2018.

1. Presumed factual basis

A. The defendant is a corporation with the aim of insurance agency business, brokerage business, insurance agency business, etc., and the plaintiff is an insurance solicitor.

When an insurance solicitor solicits insurance, the defendant shall pay the insurance solicitor a commission for solicitation, contract maintenance and management, management fees, management fees, etc. for the performance of the preceding month, and where the insurance contract is not maintained, he/she shall recover the fees already paid in accordance with

B. On April 17, 2013, C subscribed to D’s E (hereinafter “instant insurance”) through the Defendant, and the Defendant paid the Plaintiff fees for the instant insurance solicitation.

C. Around April 2017, C asserted that “A did not directly sign an application for insurance and did not properly hear the description of the goods” and that the instant insurance contract was null and void, D Co., Ltd terminated the instant insurance contract and refunded the insurance premium.

Accordingly, the Defendant asserts that the instant insurance contract constitutes “a void termination contract” and thus, the Defendant recovered 100% of the fee paid, and filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking reimbursement of KRW 13,927,800,000, and received the decision of performance recommendation as the court’s decision on March 27, 2018. The said decision was finalized around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 4-2, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 3-1 to 9, Eul evidence 4-1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff agreed not to recover fees after 12 months from the date of the insurance contract, even if it falls under the “effective termination contract” between the Defendant and the Defendant.

Therefore, there is no ground for the Defendant to recover fees as above.

B. The grounds for cancelling the invalidation of the insurance contract of this case are not attributable to the plaintiff's error, and the defendant cannot recover fees from the plaintiff.

C. The instant insurance is not solicited by the Plaintiff.

3. Determination No. 1, B.