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. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is to be written by the court of first instance as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is to be cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for adding "judgments on the defendant's assertion by this court" as set forth in paragraph (3) below.

2. As to the part of the court of first instance, the part of the court of first instance, "No obligation exists," in the 8th to 14th of the court of first instance, has been completed as follows.

“The instant monetary loan contract, however, is a juristic act which is a condition subsequent, which becomes null and void without a separate declaration of intention, or is a juristic act which is incorporated into a whole of the instant share sales contract, and thus, the instant monetary loan contract was null and void or cancelled as a result of the revocation of the instant share sales contract. Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay a loan under the instant monetary loan contract. Accordingly, the Defendant is obliged to pay the above evidence during the 8th page of the first instance judgment of “the foregoing evidence, evidence No. 14, evidence No. 10, and evidence No. 10, No. 14, and witness No. 10, and witness No. Ma.”

The portion of the 9th to 10th of the first instance judgment in the 17th of the 17th to 10th of the 10th of the 10th of the 10th of the

In the process of entering into the instant share purchase contract, the Defendant sought explanation of the situation, etc. of the non-party company from M and received relevant data from M in the middle of December 2015. At the time of entering into the instant share purchase contract, the Defendant took the accounts of the non-party company and confirmed the financial status, etc. of the non-party company. Therefore, it appears that the status of the non-party company’s sales, financial status, etc. seems to have been outlined (the Defendant did not raise any objection or problem against the situation of the non-party company before filing the instant lawsuit).