In recent years, with the rapid development of the online live broadcasting industry, disputes caused by breach of contract frequently occur. Recently, the People's Court of Fancheng District, Xiangyang City, Hubei Province, heard a dispute caused by the "job hopping" of the anchor, and decided that the anchor Zhao should pay 8000 yuan of liquidated damages to the media company. In June 2020, Zhao signed the Anchor Signing Agreement with a media company and became the signed anchor of the company. It is agreed in the contract that the media company is responsible for training, packaging, guidance and promotion of Mr. Zhao; Zhao can only serve as an anchor on a platform approved by the media company for cooperation and agreed to broadcast; The agreement is valid for one year, from June 4, 2020 to June 4, 2021. At the same time, it is also agreed that if Zhao performs on other platforms without the permission of the media company, the media company has the right to cancel the anchor qualification of Zhao and require Zhao to pay liquidated damages of 500000 yuan. After a period of live broadcast, Zhao wanted to cancel the contract, but the media company did not agree. Zhao left the media company on his own. In September 2020, the media company found that Zhao was unauthorized to open a live broadcast on other platforms, and thought that Zhao violated the agreement, but Zhao said that he was just playing with friends on other platforms, which was a legitimate online behavior. After the negotiation between the two parties failed, the media company appealed to the court, requesting to cancel the Anchor Signing Agreement signed by the two parties and demanding Zhao to pay liquidated damages of 500000 yuan. After the trial, the court held that, from the live video and photos of Zhao provided by the media company, the live broadcast interface includes the number of viewers, fans, gifts, and their PK with others. During the live broadcast, there are viewers, traffic and income. It is a commercial activity completed by other platforms and should be recognized as a live broadcast behavior. Zhao left the media company without the consent of the media company during the contract period since September 2020, and his live broadcast on other platforms has constituted a breach of contract, so he shall be liable for breach of contract. Considering that Zhao has been engaged in live broadcast activities in media companies for a short time, he has only received more than 20000 yuan as a reward, and he has been engaged in live broadcast activities on other platforms less often. Even if he has benefited, his income is also very small. In addition, the media company failed to provide evidence to prove its investment cost to Mr. Zhao, nor did it submit the actual loss amount caused by Mr. Zhao's private live broadcast. The requirement for Mr. Zhao to pay a penalty of 500000 yuan was obviously too high, which violated the principle of fairness. However, as a new profession, if the webmaster can cancel the contract without any punishment after signing the contract, it will be detrimental to the maintenance of the normal order of the entire industry. As an adult, Zhao is a novice, but he should establish a sense of contract and adhere to honesty and trustworthiness. Finally, the court decided to pay a penalty of 8000 yuan to the media company based on the principle of fairness and good faith, taking into account the loss of the media company, the performance of the contract, the extent of the fault of the parties, expected benefits and other comprehensive factors. (Liu Xinshe)