1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Defendant, as the cause of the claim, acquired the sales right of the vending machine in the D Hospital, and the Defendant, as the Plaintiff did not transfer the vehicle transferred to the hospital, was terminated the lease for the vending machine business from the hospital. Accordingly, the Plaintiff became unable to operate the vending machine business.

The defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff a total of KRW 31 million for the acquisition price of the goodwill, KRW 2.55 million for the embezzled rent, and KRW 33.55 million for the damages incurred by the violation of the contract.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 20, 201, the Defendant leased a place within a hospital to install 12 teas and can vending machines (hereinafter “instant vending machines”) from D Hospital (hereinafter “instant vending machines”) with a deposit of KRW 3 million, monthly rent of KRW 100,000, and the contract term of KRW 3 years.

(hereinafter “Lease of this case”) b.

On December 6, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant to operate the instant vending machine and to extend the instant lease term scheduled to expire on May 19, 2014.

C. The Plaintiff directly paid KRW 850,000 per month to the D Hospital, but lost the hospital account number, and the Plaintiff wired KRW 850,000 to the Defendant on April 8, 2014, May 7, 2014, and June 6, 2014, and requested the Defendant to pay the rent to the hospital.

The Defendant did not immediately pay the said rent to the hospital on August 2014, and paid the rent of KRW 2.55 million (=850,000 x 3 months).

Until May 2016, the Plaintiff operated the instant vending machine in a normal manner and paid monthly the instant vehicle to the hospital, and thereafter renounced the instant vending machine business due to the decrease in income.

E. There is no evidence that the D Hospital notified the termination of the lease of this case.

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

3. The Plaintiff operated the instant vending machine until May 2016.