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. According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments in the Evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, there is no dispute between the parties to the contract, or the defendant, who operated the store C (hereinafter “instant store”) entered into a contract with the plaintiff on October 3, 2015 to transfer the business right of the instant store to the Plaintiff at KRW 110 million ( October 3, 2015) (hereinafter “instant contract”). On the same day, the plaintiff received the down payment of KRW 11 million (hereinafter “instant contract”). ② On October 4, 2015, the plaintiff demanded the defendant to return the down payment by telephone with the contract content and the actual sales of the instant store are different, and ③ The defendant, on October 23, 2015, paid the remainder to the plaintiff by October 20, 2015, who did not return the down payment or the remainder to the Plaintiff by 90 days.

“The fact that the notice was sent to the Plaintiff around that time, and that the notice was delivered to the Plaintiff, and ④ the Plaintiff did not pay the remainder of the contract of this case to the Defendant up to that day.

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. In the first place, the Defendant concluded the instant contract with the Plaintiff’s husband D stating that “The annual sales of the instant store are KRW 2 billion, and the monthly net profit is less than KRW 10 million,” and the sales of the instant store do not reach the Defendant’s explanation, and thus, the instant contract was revoked on the ground of the above Defendant’s fraud and sought the return of the down payment.

B. Preliminaryly, the defendant cancelled the contract of this case on the ground of the plaintiff's causes attributable to the defendant, and the defendant is obligated to return the amount equivalent to the contract deposit paid by

3. Determination

A. We examine the judgment on the primary argument, and the Defendant’s annual sales of the instant store to the Plaintiff.