1. Upon receiving a claim for a change in exchange from this court, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 50,000,000 and this shall apply.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 5, 2016, with regard to the establishment of the Defendant’s store and C level store (hereinafter “instant store”), the Plaintiff entered into an opening contract (hereinafter “instant opening contract”) with the Defendant that “the Defendant would allow the Plaintiff to operate the instant store after completing the interior work for the establishment of the instant store, etc., within three months from the date of the contract. The opening period shall be within three months from the date of the contract. The Plaintiff shall pay the Defendant the price of KRW 130 million, and the Defendant shall hold 30% of the shares, but the Plaintiff may sell the store to the Defendant if the Plaintiff fails to obtain any profit desired by the Plaintiff for one year after the opening of the store. In this case, the Defendant would pay the Plaintiff the purchase cost of KRW 130 million used by the Plaintiff as the opening cost, and if the purchase cost is paid, the Defendant’s share of KRW 30% is automatically terminated.”

B. On September 6, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 80 million, which is part of the price under the instant opening contract, to the Defendant.

C. On September 7, 2016, the Plaintiff leased 148.5 square meters of the first floor among the D ground buildings owned by E for the purpose of using it for the business of the instant store from E, the lease deposit amount of KRW 50 million, monthly rent of KRW 370,000,000 from September 19, 2016 to September 19, 2019.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). D.

On September 7, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 50 million to E the lease deposit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. According to the instant opening contract, Plaintiff 1 was obligated to complete the interior work, etc. of the instant store and to have the Plaintiff operate the instant store. However, the Defendant failed to comply with the contract until December 2016, when three months have elapsed from the date of the contract.

Accordingly, the plaintiff will operate the store of this case directly by the defendant and the defendant around December 2016.