The part against Defendant B is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

Defendant.

1. As to the grounds of appeal against Defendant B, the lower court maintained the first instance judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion was not recognized, on the ground that: (a) the Plaintiff’s obligation to perform the procedure for changing the name of the business entity under the instant transfer contract was the obligation to be performed prior to the Plaintiff’s payment; and (b) Defendant B delayed the performance of the said obligation even though the Plaintiff fulfilled all the obligation to pay the price under the instant transfer contract; (c) thus, (d) the Plaintiff cancelled the transfer contract in this case and sought restitution of KRW 495,810,387 out of the price paid by the Plaintiff; and (d) even if not, Defendant B’s above obligation was impossible to perform; and

However, according to the records, the court of first instance shall serve the defendant B with a copy of the complaint, the purport of the claim, the application for change of the cause of the claim, the preparatory documents, and the notice of date for pleading, etc., by public notice, and dismissed the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B. The plaintiff appealed, and the court below, upon which the plaintiff served all the copies of the petition of appeal, the grounds for appeal, the preparatory documents, and the notice of date for pleading, etc. to the defendant B, the plaintiff alleged the cause of the claim as above by making a statement on the grounds for appeal, the legal brief, etc. at the date for pleading of the court below, and the defendant B did not appear at once at the court below's date for pleading and did not submit the written reply

Nevertheless, the court below maintained the conclusion of the first instance court that dismissed the claim against Defendant B on the ground that the above cause of action is not recognized, and thus, it is so decided by the court below as to the conclusion of confession under Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act.