1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

. The initial exclusive agreement (Evidence B) is only the name of B and the Defendant’s signature, and the corporate seal of B is not affixed, and is not handed over.

On the other hand, B’s corporate seal is affixed to B’s name tag, and three parties are affixed to B’s name.

[A building lessor E and lessee B (No. 2) also have both the name plate of D and the seal imprint and the seal imprint of D Co., Ltd.). Therefore, the Defendant’s initial exclusive contract cannot be deemed as the first completed contract even if it can be deemed as a contract destroyed in the course of preparing the instant exclusive contract.

(2) In comparison with the initial contract of the Defendant’s assertion, the Plaintiff added the phrase “*” to each note under Article 6 of the exclusive contract of this case, and the phrase “from February 2017 to February 2017” (the first contract of the Defendant’s assertion refers to the phrase “from February 2017”) to the phrase “from February 2017,” and the phrase “if an agreement is not reached, it shall be subject to the decision on the interpretation of “B”.

As can be seen, the instant exclusive contract contains a clause that specifically sets forth an ambiguous part of the terms and conditions set forth in the Defendant’s initial contract or modifies some of the terms and conditions.

Therefore, as alleged by the Defendant, the instant exclusive contract does not simply include the Defendant’s name and seal in the initial contract of the Defendant’s assertion.

③ The circumstance that the instant exclusive contract was finally made between the Plaintiff and the Defendant does not dispute.

The Defendant was the representative director B at the time of the instant exclusive contract.