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

A. On November 8, 2012, the Plaintiff concluded a contract for transferring or taking over a business entity’s operating business premium amounting to KRW 430 million (hereinafter “instant contract”) with Defendant C (hereinafter “instant franchise store”) by designating Defendant CCC Business Start Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) as the main company, and between C and C.

B. The Plaintiff paid to the Defendant Company a total of KRW 30 million, including KRW 20 million on November 9, 2012 and KRW 10 million on November 20, 2012.

C. Meanwhile, the instant contract was rescinded on February 4, 2013, because it was not approved by the Paris store head office for the transfer of the instant franchise store.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-4 evidence

2. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendants agreed not only to refund the instant service cost in the event that the instant contract is terminated due to the rejection of approval of the head office, but also that Defendant B used the instant service cost for personal purposes without paying the service cost to the Defendant company. The Plaintiff sought the return of the instant service cost against the Defendants.

However, in full view of the evidence No. 1 and No. 1, the purport of the entire argument is as follows: ① the Plaintiff agreed to pay the consulting service fee even after the contract was terminated due to the transactional circumstances without the intention or negligence of the supervising company at the time of the instant contract; ② On November 8, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendants pursuant to the instant agreement, without returning the instant service fee received by the Defendant Company to the Plaintiff on the ground that “if the Defendant Company did not have intention or negligence due to the transfer of the business entity, the Plaintiff did not make any civil or criminal objection; and on any reason, the Plaintiff promised not to raise any civil or criminal objection against the Defendant B; and ③ prepared the “certificate of payment of the cost of transferring the business entity’s head office” with the content that “the head office of Parisbrate is not the head office.