1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

Judgment of the first instance.

1. The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as stated in the part concerning the plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following additional judgments, and therefore, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Additional Decision] Prior to determining the validity of the Plaintiff’s claim for damages of this case against the Defendant, the first instance court determined that the Plaintiff’s filing of the instant lawsuit against the Plaintiff against the foregoing Plaintiff, inasmuch as it was found that the Plaintiff drafted and executed a written agreement to the effect that “if the Plaintiff received KRW 7 million for the damage incurred by the acquisition of the instant vehicle after December 15, 201, it would not be held a civil and criminal liability for the persons related to the instant vehicle, including the Defendant, who is the D representative director, after receiving payment of KRW 7 million for the damage incurred by the acquisition of the instant vehicle,” the Plaintiff’s filing of the lawsuit of this case against the foregoing written agreement, cannot be permitted due to its illegality.

The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff's deception did not affect the lawsuit of this case since the plaintiff had been engaged in the 4.5 tons of freezing vehicles prior to the 15.5 ton of this case. Thus, the plaintiff's deception did not affect the lawsuit of this case.

However, in light of the circumstances of the instant land entry contract, the content and time of the said land entry agreement, the investigation results against the Defendant, etc., and other circumstances, the said land entry agreement constitutes legitimate acts performed within the scope of disposition and predicted rights. The Plaintiff’s assertion alone does not affect the instant lawsuit seeking compensation for damages incurred to the Plaintiff due to the acquisition of the instant vehicle, and thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

2. As such, the instant lawsuit shall be dismissed as it is unlawful against the non-committee agreement.

The judgment of the court of first instance with this conclusion is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.