1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant purchased an automobile listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) from the Defendant, and paid KRW 22,00,000 to the Defendant in return for the value of business license (business license). However, when the Plaintiff purchases a new vehicle, the Plaintiff agreed to attach the said business license plate to a new vehicle.

The plaintiff purchased a new vehicle after the vehicle in this case was scrapped, but the defendant did not attach the number plate to a new vehicle but transferred it to a new owner of the vehicle.

Therefore, the plaintiff is claiming for the payment of 22,00,000 won and damages for delay to the defendant due to the impossibility of performing the obligation to transfer the business number.

2. According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 3, it is recognized that the plaintiff entered into a truck repair and management contract with the defendant on March 30, 2010 with respect to the instant vehicle.

However, the evidence No. 4 cannot be used as evidence because there is no evidence to acknowledge the authenticity of the evidence. The statement No. 6, which seems to correspond to the plaintiff's assertion, is difficult to believe, and the statement of No. 3 and No. 5, alone, is insufficient to recognize the fact of an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant to attach business numbers to new vehicles, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.