1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On August 2018, the Plaintiff purchased from the Defendant for KRW 190,000,00 the D store’s operating rights in Busan-gu, Busan-gu, and agreed to invalidate the sales contract if the Plaintiff fails to obtain permission from the head office to operate the D store, the Plaintiff agreed to invalidate the sales contract.

On July 20, 2018, when the Plaintiff had held the Defendant, KRW 100,000,000 of the purchase price was offset against loan claims of KRW 100,000,000, and the remainder of KRW 90,000 was paid in installments on August 29, 2018 and September 3, 2018.

Since the plaintiff was absent from the E-Interview, the above sales contract is null and void.

However, the Defendant returned only KRW 61,200,000 out of the purchase price.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the remaining purchase price of KRW 128,800,000 and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. (Preliminary Claim) Since the above sales contract was invalidated as above, set-off against the Plaintiff’s loan claim amounting to KRW 100,000,000 on July 20, 2018 cannot take effect, and the Plaintiff’s loan claim extinguished as a set-off was returned.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a loan of 100,000,000 and damages for delay.

2. Determination

A. There is no evidence that the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract with the Defendant on August 2018 regarding the right to operate a store.

However, according to the evidence No. 1, the defendant is only recognized as having entered into a sales contract with the plaintiff as the representative of F.

The plaintiff's assertion on this part is without merit to further examine.

B. Even if the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff offsets the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay KRW 100,000,000 out of the purchase price for D points against the Defendant’s loan claims of KRW 100,000,000 against the Defendant on July 20, 2018, and the above sales contract becomes null and void thereafter, the Plaintiff’s loan claims, as a matter of course, may lead to the occurrence of the obligation to return the purchase price, etc. under the invalidation of the sales contract.