1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 2, and 3 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff is obligated to pay the plaintiff the above premium amounting to KRW 10,000,000 as the premium (hereinafter referred to as "the premium agreement of this case") and delay damages on September 10, 2013, when transferring a restaurant (hereinafter referred to as "D") with the defendant and the first floor of the ASEAN in the City of Busan (hereinafter referred to as "the instant restaurant") on September 10, 2013. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the above premium of KRW 10,00,000 and delay damages.

2. The defendant's assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant alleged as follows: (a) paid the Plaintiff KRW 10,000,000 as the instant premium (=2,000,000 KRW 5,000,000 KRW 800,000 KRW 1,50,000 KRW 113,000,000 KRW 1,50,000; and (b) thus, the Plaintiff’s claim is unjust.

① KRW 2,00,000 paid on July 9, 2013 ② KRW 5,000,000 paid on September 3, 2013 ③ 80,000,000 paid on October 8, 2013. ④ The Plaintiff paid KRW 487,000 on behalf of the Defendant with the electric charge in arrears in operating the instant restaurant, etc.

B. According to the reasoning of the judgment 1 above, the Defendant paid KRW 2,00,000 to the Plaintiff on July 9, 2013, even though it is recognized that the Defendant paid KRW 2,00,000 to the Plaintiff on July 9, 2013. Meanwhile, it is insufficient to view that the date when the said KRW 2,00,000 was paid was earlier than September 10, 2013, which was the date of the instant premium agreement, solely based on the evidence submitted by the Defendant, the said KRW 2,00,000 was paid as the premium, and it is otherwise recognized.