1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 24, 2010, C leased the building of the 1st floor in Songpa-gu Seoul, Songpa-gu, Seoul, and operated the wedding hall (hereinafter “instant wedding hall”) with the trade name “E” from May 1, 2010.

B. On February 25, 2010, the Plaintiff signed an agreement on the instant wedding and beauty art business, setting the term of KRW 500 million and the term of contract by December 31, 2012 (hereinafter “instant agreement”), which agreed to cooperate in the instant wedding and beauty art business (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

C. The instant wedding hall was closed upon the termination of the lease agreement due to the late payment of the rent for the wedding building by C. The Plaintiff was refunded KRW 120 million out of the business bonds of the instant agreement.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) since the plaintiff entered into the instant agreement with the defendant who is the husband of C, the actual party to the instant agreement is the defendant, while the instant agreement has been terminated due to the closure of the instant wedding hall, and the defendant is obligated to pay the remaining business bonds (=50 million won - 120 million won) to the plaintiff. The proviso to Article 48 of the Commercial Act provides that if the other party does not know that he/she is for his/her own interest, he/she may also claim performance against the agent. Since the plaintiff did not know that the defendant entered into the instant agreement on behalf of C at the time of entering into the instant agreement, the defendant, a representative, is obligated to pay the remaining business bonds to the plaintiff KRW 380 million.

3. Although the Defendant did not intend to refund the business guarantee money at the time of the instant agreement, the Defendant deceiving the Plaintiff that the deposit for the lease of the instant wedding hall would actually be KRW 1 billion, and that the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the business guarantee money for real estate owned by the Defendant would be completed.