1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 18, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, as the Plaintiff’s owner, drafted a lease contract with the Plaintiff and the lessee as the Defendant, with the Plaintiff and the lessee as the Defendant, as the Plaintiff’s owner of the Plaintiff, and KRW 70 million in the column of the special agreement, shall be repaid within three years, and KRW 100 million in the loans of the Plaintiff and the Defendant shall be repaid after the liquidation of the loans of the E Association.

b. include the statement that "the share is 50:50 after all debts have been disposed of."

hereinafter referred to as the "instant contract"

B) From around the day of the instant contract, the Plaintiff had the Defendant operate the instant scraper. D around August 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to sell the instant scraper to a third party, and sold the instant scraper at KRW 120 million to a third party around September 2016. [In the absence of any dispute over recognition, there is no ground for dispute over recognition, the entries in subparagraphs 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole.

2. The parties' assertion

A. After the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant earned operating income of KRW 131,911,214 for about one year and six months from the date of sale of the instant Leler to a third party, but the Defendant paid only KRW 21,248,789 out of the debt owed to E, among the debt owed by the instant Leler, until the contract of this case is cancelled.

Around August 2016, the Defendant agreed to sell the instant voucher to a third party and to sell it to a third party without any choice, and sold the instant voucher to a third party. The amount of the instant voucher was paid in the proceeds of the sale, but the amount of KRW 28,751,211 out of the amount of the EDR’s obligation to the EDR remains.

Since the contract of this case was terminated, the plaintiff returned 21,248,789 won to the E Union that the defendant repaid to the defendant in accordance with the principle of contract rescission, and the defendant shall return to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 130 million, which is the operating profit of the Er.m., the plaintiff shall return to the plaintiff.