1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Around September 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with Defendant B with the content that the Plaintiff transfers all of the facilities and rights of the entertainment tavern E (hereinafter “instant establishment”) located on the first floor of the building underground in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant establishment”) to the Defendants in the price of KRW 250 million.

(A) No. 1, hereinafter “instant sales contract”). B.

The instant sales contract states that KRW 150 million, out of the purchase price of KRW 250 million, shall be paid by the Defendants immediately after the conclusion of the sales contract, and the remaining KRW 100 million shall be paid after October 6, 2015, from the date of opening the business of the Defendants. The Plaintiff received KRW 150 million on the date of opening the sales contract, and the Defendants began to conduct business after moving the facilities of the instant business after changing the name of the instant business to F.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination as to the cause of claim 1) Defendant C did not sign the contract with Defendant C, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the contract was concluded orally, and the Plaintiff’s claim based on the premise that Defendant C entered into the contract of this case is without merit. The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff is jointly and severally liable to pay the remainder with Defendant B pursuant to Article 57 of the Commercial Act. However, as seen below (B) is not recognized as a contractual obligation under the contract with Defendant B, the above assertion is without merit, as the Defendants concluded the contract of this case, and thus, Defendant B was obligated to pay the purchase price to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

B. Defendant B, upon entering into the instant sales contract, became aware that the Plaintiff was not the right holder of the instant business establishment, and that G, the title holder of the instant business establishment, and the lessee, was the actual right holder.