1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

1. On July 3, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract under which the Defendant and the first instance trial co-defendant C, D (hereinafter “Defendant, etc.”) and the Defendant, etc. acquire all of their business rights, such as goodwill, authorization and permission rights, facilities, fixtures, office fixtures, membership rights, etc. to a general restaurant located in Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E (hereinafter “F”), which are operated by the Defendant, etc. (hereinafter “instant contract”). The Plaintiff paid KRW 150 million to the Defendant, etc., KRW 30 million (the contract termination date, KRW 30 million, the intermediate payment of KRW 45 million, August 4, 2014, the intermediate payment of KRW 45 million, the remainder payment of KRW 75 million, the lease deposit, and KRW 200 million, respectively, on September 1, 2014, on the date of the contract, KRW 30 million,500,000,000,00 won (hereinafter “instant contract”).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 and 2

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Defendant, etc. explained to the Plaintiff that the monthly average sales of F amounted to KRW 80 million. The Defendant, etc. demanded the Plaintiff to submit sales data from January 2, 2014 to June 2014, on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff, who took time from January 7, 2014 to June 11, 2014, demanded the Plaintiff to first prepare the sales data, and (b) strongly demand the Plaintiff to prepare the sales data by the next day, and received the sales data, and if the content differs from each other, it would be better for the Plaintiff to have no contract.

Accordingly, when the Plaintiff believed the horses of the Defendant, etc. and drafted a contract on July 3, 2014, the Plaintiff paid only KRW 15 million out of the down payment of KRW 30 million in advance, and paid the remainder of KRW 15 million on July 21, 2014, which is after confirmation of the sales data.

B. As can be seen, the instant contract was concluded on the condition that the Defendant, etc. deliver F’s sales data (from January 4, 2014 to June 2014) by July 4, 2014. The transferor, etc. also presents and explain the sales-related data to the assignee (Article 17), and the Defendant, etc. did not perform the said obligation even if he/she had been given a peremptory notice by the grace period until July 14, 2014.

In addition, sales shall be.