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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

2. Judgment on the issue

가. 원고의 주장 이 사건 인수계약은 원고, 피고, E 사이에 비숑프리제 양육 및 분양사업에 관한 동업계약(이하 ‘이 사건 동업계약’이라 한다)이 체결될 것을 정지조건으로 하여 체결된 것인데, 이 사건 동업계약이 성립하지 않았으므로 이 사건 인수계약의 효력은 발생하지 않았다.

Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay 150 million won and damages for delay to the plaintiff with the return of unjust enrichment.

B. The main issue of the instant case is the main issue of the instant case, since there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the instant contract was not constituted, it is ultimately whether the instant contract was concluded under the condition of suspension.

C. Inasmuch as the condition of determination is an accessory to a juristic act which restricts the validity of the said juristic act by adding the content of the said juristic act to the content of the said juristic act at the same time by the declaration of intent, the issue of whether the specific facts constitute the fulfillment of the condition attached to a certain juristic act may be deemed as belonging to the interpretation of the declaration of intent. However, it is a matter of fact-finding which is not a certain condition attached to any juristic act, and the

(Supreme Court Decision 2006Da35766 Decided November 24, 2006). In full view of Gap evidence, Gap evidence Nos. 5, Gap evidence No. 15, and testimony of witness E of the court of first instance, the plaintiff could have been deemed to have been in need of assistance of persons experienced in the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field of the field