A. On November 25, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to transfer to the Plaintiff the right to the above old store, including all of the above business facilities, at KRW 34,00,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”). In relation to the transfer of the old store without permission operated by the Defendant between the Defendant and the Defendant (hereinafter “instant old store”), the Defendant agreed to transfer the above old store’s right to the Plaintiff, including all of the above business facilities (hereinafter “instant contract”).

Around that time, the Plaintiff paid KRW 34,000,000 to the Defendant, and the Defendant transferred the above facilities to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff began to engage in the business of selling the State, etc. at the street store.

B. Upon entering into the instant contract, the Defendant stated to the Plaintiff, “I would like to be unable to engage in the instant contract,” “I would like to cut down the money after three months,” and “I would like to cut off the money without being raised,” and “I would like to get the money deducted without being raised. In addition, when there was a problem, for example, when I would like to be in a situation where I would not engage in funeral, I would see it under the same conditions.”

C. From June 26, 2014, the head of Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, the head of the Dong-gu has expressed that the above store will interfere with the walking and safety of the residents, thus, to voluntarily remove it, and if not voluntarily remove it, the head of Bupyeong-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City will perform administrative vicarious execution.

In the end, the head of Bupyeong-gu removed six street points installed in F on December 19, 2014 by proxy, and the instant street points were removed in the process.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute between the parties, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including branch numbers), witness E and G testimony, fact inquiry results against the Mayor/Do governor of Incheon Metropolitan City, results of this court's verification, the whole purport of arguments, and the whole purport of arguments

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff asserted by the plaintiff 1 as to the primary cause of claim shall be removed in the nearest time because the defendant's prior notice of vicarious administrative execution, etc. of the old store of this case is given.