1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 7, 2017, the Plaintiffs entered into a travel contract with the Defendant (which is operating the J) with Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and Finland. The travel period from August 19, 2017 to August 26, 2017, total travel expenses of KRW 27,816,00 (i.e., KRW 3,477,000) ¡¿ 8, each 3,660,000 to KRW 183,00 (D/C) and the down payment of KRW 8 million to the Defendant on the same day (hereinafter “instant contract”).

나. 피고는 2017. 2. 9. 선정자 C에게 K으로 위 계약 내용 외에 “◎ 계약 후 계약금은 반환되지 않는 점 알려드립니다. ◎관광 특별 약관이 적용됩니다. 취소 시 핸들링차지 5%가 발생됩니다.”라는 내용이 포함된 국외 여행 계약서(이하 ‘제1계약서’라 한다)를 보냈다.

C. On February 14, 2017, the Appointor C visited the J event and drafted a written contract (hereinafter “second contract”) stating “other special articles” in the “other special articles” column in the first contract as follows: “The air wave (in the case of a remaining period of 30 days) and the down payment in the handbling vehicle, KRW 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00

On March 21, 2017, the Plaintiffs demanded the Defendant to cancel the instant contract, and on March 27, 2017, the Defendant returned 5.6 million won remaining after deducting the sum of KRW 2.4 million per capita from KRW 8 million to KRW 3 million paid to the Plaintiffs on March 27, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. As the representative of the plaintiffs C did not hear any explanation from the defendant at the time of signing the second contract, the plaintiffs' representative C thought it is the same as the first contract that was received in advance and signed. Thus, the second contract cannot be the content of the instant contract, and the instant contract is not the content of the contract.