1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The defendant-Counterclaim plaintiff's counterclaim extended in the trial of the court.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for adding the following judgments, is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendant asserts to the effect that “the Plaintiff is liable for damages due to the nonperformance of the instant modified agreement, as the Plaintiff did not perform the matters to be observed in the instant modified agreement and carried out compulsory execution against the Defendant’s property, and caused enormous damages due to the decline in sales,” but it is difficult to deem the content of the instant modified agreement as a complete prohibition of compulsory execution in accordance with the existing final and conclusive judgment. ② According to the evidence 2-2 and 3 of the evidence 2-2 and 2-3, following the Incheon District Court’s District Court’s 2016TT 4892, 2016T 568, the claims against the Defendant’s credit card sales proceeds and insurance proceeds claims against the Defendant’s property, and the Defendant did not clearly state any direct causal relationship between the Plaintiff’s credit card sales proceeds and the decrease in sales at the hospital and the hospital (the Plaintiff’s 1-2). However, it appears that the Plaintiff’s 1-2 and the Plaintiff’s 5-1-5-1-6-6-1-6-6-6-6-2-2-2-2-2-2-2- the Plaintiff’s 1 and 1-2-2-3-3-3-2-2-3-3-2-3-3.