1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows, and the reasons for the court's explanation is as follows, except where "tourist distribution type" in the sixth 13th th 13th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th

2. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant did not notify the Plaintiff of the fact that it is difficult to establish a Class II district unit plan of a specific type or a distribution type within six months since the Defendant did not allocate the volume of the Red Military Master Plan in 2020 or the amount falls short of the volume, thereby entering into the instant service contract with the Defendant, which entered into the instant service contract with the Defendant, on the ground that the instant service contract was revoked on the ground of deception by omission and sought the return of the amount stated in the claim by reinstatement

However, at the time of the conclusion of the instant service contract, the Defendant agreed to promote the instant district unit plan with the Plaintiff in a specific type or circulation type.

As seen earlier, it cannot be deemed that an agreement was made to complete the establishment of a district unit plan by June 30, 2012, and thus, it is difficult to accept the foregoing assertion on the premise that the establishment of a Class II district unit plan for a specific type or distribution type within six months is complete as a content of the instant service contract.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.