On July 15, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant invested KRW 60,000,000 in each of the 60,000,000 and entered into a partnership agreement with the Plaintiff and the Defendant to operate the home (hereinafter “D”).

B. After that, the Plaintiff and the Defendant registered the business in the joint name on the 21st of the same month and operated the D points.

C. Of that, on July 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant were to operate the house of the same trade name in Seodaemun-gu Seoul (hereinafter “F store”) in addition to the house of the same trade name (hereinafter “F store”), and the Plaintiff paid KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant on August 31, 2015.

However, around September 3, 2015, the defendant registered the business of the F points in his own name and operated the F points independently.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant to operate the F points as a partnership was reversed after the defendant registered the business of the F points in his own name and started to operate the F points independently.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above KRW 30,00,000,000, which was paid from the plaintiff as the opening capital of the F Points, and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 15% per annum from January 23, 2016 to the day of complete payment, which is the day following the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case claimed by the plaintiff.

B. As to this, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the other party who agreed to operate the F Points as a partnership business is G, not the Plaintiff, and that it merely remitted KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant from the bank account in the name of the Plaintiff managed by G. Therefore, the Defendant cannot comply with the Plaintiff’s claim in this case.

In general, who is the party to the contract is a matter of interpretation of the party's intention.