1. The Defendant’s KRW 50,000,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 6% from February 20, 2017 to November 6, 2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is a company running a postnatal care business, etc. in Kimpo-si, and the Plaintiff received an investment scheme from Nonparty C, the former representative of the Defendant, and entered into an investment contract with the Defendant on February 18, 2017 (hereinafter “instant investment contract”).

The main contents of the investment contract of this case are “If the plaintiff invests 50 million won to the defendant, the defendant shall adopt a resolution to increase capital for new shares within 14 days from the date on which the investment is fully paid, to allocate 5% of the shares to the plaintiff.”

B. On February 20, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 50,000,000 to the Defendant Company’s account. The Defendant did not proceed with the procedure for issuing new shares as stipulated in the instant investment contract even before September 2017.

C. On September 5, 2017, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content that contains an intent to cancel the instant investment contract on the ground that the Plaintiff failed to perform the obligation to allocate shares, and the Defendant received it around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant investment contract was lawfully rescinded due to the Defendant’s nonperformance (the purport that the contract was rescinded in accordance with the notification made by September 5, 2017, or was rescinded by the delivery of a copy of the instant complaint) and sought the payment of the investment amount and the damages for delay.

B. In the termination of a contract based on the delay of the performance of the obligation as to the rescission of the investment contract in this case, the highest notice of performance, which is a prerequisite of the premise, does not necessarily have to be given with a certain period specified in advance, and the right of rescission shall arise after

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 89Meu1410, Mar. 27, 1990). In other words, the peremptory notice for performance does not require a reasonable period to be specified, and the peremptory notice and the declaration of intent for rescission are made.