1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. In full view of the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and Eul evidence Nos. 3 (including paper numbers) as to the cause of the claim, the defendant was established for the purpose of consulting and building computer system integration and building service business, hosting (webbsite production and management), and related service business, etc., and the defendant and C, if purchased at least 3.5 million won per unit with the non-party C on June 20, 2017, purchased at least 3.5 to 3,500,000 won per unit, managing and operating it, and hold an investment briefing session that provides 15 to 20,000 won per month after extracting 2.5 to 3 to 4 months. Accordingly, the plaintiff heard the above investment explanatory session and accordingly, remitted KRW 3.5 million to the defendant's corporate account (in Busan Bank, account number E) on June 26, 2017, and the defendant thereafter provided the plaintiff with DNA mining management and operation for the plaintiff.

According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff jointly held an investment explanatory meeting with the Defendant and C entered into an entrusted operation agreement for the purchase and sale of D mining machines and the entrusted operation agreement, and that the Defendant failed to perform its duty to pay encryption as stipulated in the above contract. The evidence alone submitted by the Defendant is insufficient to reverse the above recognition.

Therefore, since the above D mining period sales and entrusted operation contract was cancelled by the service of the original copy of the instant payment order containing the Plaintiff’s expression of intent to cancel the contract, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from February 3, 2018 to the date of full payment, which is clear that it is the next day after the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the Defendant.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.