1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the parts against Defendant C and D shall be modified as follows:

Defendant C and D shall be jointly and severally.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant C is the representative director of Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”), and Defendant D is the father of Defendant C.

B. On October 18, 2009, the Plaintiff’s East E and E’s wife (hereinafter collectively referred to as “F, etc.”) set a golf practice range on the fourth and fifth fifth floor of the Heung-gu G H sports center on the ground of Cheongju-si (hereinafter “instant golf practice range”) from October 18, 2009 as the lease term of three years from October 18, 2009, lease deposit amount of KRW 50 million, and KRW 8 million per month of rent (excluding value-added tax).

On the other hand, Defendant B agreed to compensate for the expenses incurred by F et al. when transferring the object during the above lease period by compensating for the depreciation of the facility cost.

C. At around 2010, E transferred the instant golf practice range business to the Plaintiff, who is his model, and the management of the said golf practice range was agreed to continue E.

After that, the Plaintiff paid approximately KRW 400 million to the golf driving range of this case and installed a cooling temperature room.

on August 2, 2011, F et al.: (a) assigned part of the instant golf driving range to K from August 25, 201 to October 18, 2012; (b) assigned to K a sub-lease deposit of KRW 20 million; and (c) sub-lease of KRW 350,000 per month.

E. On June 17, 2012, after Defendant C’s acquisition of all rights and obligations through a corporate transfer and takeover contract, the F et al. entered into a contract for the transfer of business with Defendant C with the consent of the Plaintiff to transfer the instant golf range business to KRW 170 million (hereinafter “instant transfer of business”).

The plaintiff asserts that the contracting party to the business transfer contract of this case is the plaintiff himself, not the F, etc., and therefore, the plaintiff's internal transfer of the business of the golf driving range of this case to the plaintiff is as mentioned above. However, according to the evidence Nos. 3, 4, and 4 and 5 of the evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the real estate sale contract of this case (the transfer of rights) is included.