The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, this part of the ground of appeal is the purport of disputing the fact-finding by the lower court that the Plaintiff could incur a significant damage to the Defendant if the Plaintiff did not perform its obligations at the time of concluding the instant sales contract

The acknowledgement of facts and the cooking and evaluation of evidence, which form the basis thereof, are within the discretionary power of the fact-finding court unless they exceed the limit of the free evaluation of evidence.

Although examining records, the above fact-finding by the court below does not seem to have exceeded the bounds of reasonable free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules.

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, the lower court, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, constitutes a provision which has lost fairness in violation of the principle of good faith.

In the event of cancellation of a contract, it does not constitute a clause that unfairly gives up the customer's right to restitution when the contract is terminated, and the amount of penalty for breach of contract is not unfairly excessive.

Examining the record in accordance with the relevant legal principles, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the interpretation and application of the Act on the Regulation of Terms and Conditions (hereinafter “Terms and Conditions Regulation Act”) or by violating the Supreme Court precedents.

The precedents cited in the grounds of appeal (Supreme Court Decision 96Da19758 delivered on September 10, 1996, Supreme Court Decision 98Da33260 delivered on March 26, 199) are different from this case and are not appropriate to be invoked in this case.

3. As to the ground of appeal No. 3, a judgment on the party's assertion and other means of offence and defense should be indicated to the extent that it can be recognized that the main text is justifiable, and it is not necessary to determine all of the parties' allegations or means of offence and defense.

(See Article 208 of the Civil Procedure Act). Accordingly, the court's decision is specifically and directly made on the matters alleged by the parties.