1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 7, 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract for transferring premium of KRW 65,00,00, including all facilities with respect to E (hereinafter “instant building”) located on the fourth floor of the Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D ground building, where C had been operated by C (hereinafter “instant building,” and the said E “instant public notice board”). From that time, the Defendant operated the instant public notice board from that time.

B. On May 3, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a transfer contract with the Defendant to KRW 53,000,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”) including all of the facilities with respect to the instant Institute of Notification, and the terms and conditions of the said contract include the following:

- A contract is concluded after mutual dialogue between the transferor and the transferee after confirming the present location of the transferor. - A contract is concluded after verifying various documents (a certified copy of the building land register, land use planning confirmation personnel, and building management ledger). - The entry fee is the transferor’s share for the remainder transfer on the basis of the balance date, and

C. The instant building was owned by F from around September 2013, when the Defendant operated the instant Gosiwon to the present date, and the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with F on the instant Gosiwon from May 2016 and operated the said Gosiwon.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. At the time of the instant contract, the Plaintiff agreed to compensate when the Defendant would enjoy water leakage in the instant Public Notice Board. On July 2016, the Plaintiff discovered water leakage from the previous public Notice Board, and completed construction by bringing KRW 8,000,000 around October 2016. The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff should pay KRW 8,000,000 and the delay damages therefrom in accordance with the said agreement.

The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 6 through 8 are insufficient to recognize that there was an agreement as alleged by the Plaintiff, and otherwise, the Institute of Public Notice in this case.