1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff's assertion was the representative director of corporation B (hereinafter "B") from July 8, 2005 to December 22, 2006, and C actually operated the plaintiff's husband, and D performed the duty of explaining the contract to the local business operators who concluded the local business contract as the employee of Eul.

B On August 18, 2005, between the Defendant and the Defendant, the Defendant and the Defendant entered into a contract on the use of the management sound source with the content that B permits the use of the sound source that the Defendant received from the phonogram producers and collects and pays the fee to the Defendant.

B) Around that time, a local business entity entered into a local business contract with a local business entity and received a security deposit. A local business entity filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff, C, D, and B against the Seoul Central District Court 2010Gahap61675 on the ground that it misleads the Plaintiff, C, D, and B into a local business entity’s claim for compensation, and the said court rendered a judgment on February 23, 2012 that “the Plaintiff, C, D, and B jointly and severally compensate for the total amount of KRW 192,00,000 to the local business entities, including E,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive, and the Plaintiff fully compensated for the total amount of KRW 192,00,000 to the local business entities, including E, etc.

However, the local business contract entered into with the local business operator B is concluded in advance with the defendant, and although the defendant obtained the approval, the defendant unfairly terminated the food use contract with the local business operator B and notified him of the suspension of the use of the sound source. Accordingly, the local business operator B was unable to supply the sound source to the local business operator as above, and the defendant was liable to compensate for the above damages since the violation of the contract by the defendant, which caused damage exceeding KRW 717,296,703, and the plaintiff is liable to compensate for the damages of KRW 192,00,000 to the local business operator E, etc., and the plaintiff has the right to compensate for the damages corresponding thereto.