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

However, the defendant did not pay the price to the plaintiff even after completion of the above Go-gu sales, and did not pay the land rent.

Therefore, the defendant should pay the plaintiff the sales price of the Go-gu horse and the land rent.

The Defendant agreed not to be entrusted with the sale of Go-gu horse, but to jointly operate the Go-gu horse sales business with the Plaintiff, and upon the Plaintiff’s burden of KRW 100 million, the Defendant paid KRW 15 million each year after paying profits through the Go-gu horse sales business. Accordingly, each of the instant letters was drawn up.

However, since the Plaintiff did not bear KRW 100,000, the Defendant does not have a duty to pay the Plaintiff the said money.

Judgment

With respect to the claim for the payment of the consignment sale price of Go-gu, the plaintiff submitted a letter (Evidence 1) prepared by the defendant and a notice of the shipment of the consigned goods (Evidence 2) as evidence of the fact that the plaintiff was entrusted with the sale of Go-gu horse and the defendant sold.

However, considering the following circumstances, the Plaintiff entrusted the Defendant with the sale of so-called horse only by the above evidence.

It is difficult to recognize the fact that the defendant sold the meat entrusted to him, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

① Each written statement prepared by the Defendant merely states that the Defendant bears the Plaintiff’s obligation of KRW 150 million, and does not include the content that the obligation was incurred due to the consignment sale of Go-gu.

② The Plaintiff did not specify the time when the Defendant entrusted the sale of the scrap and the time when the Defendant entrusted the sale of the scrap horse, and confirmed that the Defendant’s purchase of the scrap horse was KRW 1.2 million.