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

A. On September 24, 2013, the Defendant entered into a store use contract between the head of the facilities C and the head of the facilities C, setting the period of use from September 24, 2013 to September 23, 2016, with respect to the premises located in the facilities located in the Gu and Si/Gu, and operated the carpet (hereinafter “E”) with the trade name “E” from the head of the facilities C, upon obtaining permission for the use of the public property for the premises located in the above premises.

B. On May 29, 2015, the Defendant entered into a transfer contract with the Plaintiff to transfer the instant car page operating right to KRW 50 million (hereinafter “instant transfer contract”). The Plaintiff paid KRW 50 million to the Defendant according to the instant transfer contract and operated the instant car page by September 23, 2016 upon delivery.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant cannot sublet the instant car page or transfer its management under the special conditions for the store use contract and the use permission between the Defendant and the Gu and the Gu, and it is prohibited that the Defendant may not claim the premium for the instant car page to C facilities and the successor operators.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not show the above terms and conditions to the plaintiff, and caused the plaintiff to enter into the transfer contract of this case by deceiving the plaintiff about the illegality of the transfer contract of this case and the receiving premium, and the possibility of collecting the transfer proceeds.

Therefore, the instant transfer contract was concluded by the Defendant’s deception or mistake of motive inducedd by the Defendant. As such, the Plaintiff cancelled the instant transfer contract pursuant to Articles 109 and 110 of the Civil Act, and claims the return of KRW 50 million paid to the Defendant pursuant to the instant transfer contract.

3. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the defendant shall sublease or manage the property permitted by the defendant in a store use contract concluded between the defendant and the head of the C facilities.