1. The Defendant’s KRW 120,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from December 3, 2016 to July 28, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 9, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the actual representative of the E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) on March 9, 2016, as well as Nonparty C, D, to purchase from the Defendant the right to permit the construction of an apartment (hereinafter “instant right”) obtained from the Young-gu Busan Metropolitan City Young-gu Office (hereinafter “instant land”) and the non-party company’s acquisition of the right to permit the construction of an apartment (hereinafter “instant right”) from the Defendant for KRW 2.2 billion. At the same time, the Plaintiff presented the documents for the transfer of the business to the registration office designated by the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and at the same time, the Plaintiff would pay KRW 120 million out of the business acquisition price to the Defendant, and the Defendant concluded a contract for the transfer of the business to the non-party company immediately after the Plaintiff acquired the non-party company (hereinafter “instant contract”).

(A) Evidence No. 1). (b)

The Plaintiff paid KRW 120,00,000 in total to the Defendant on March 9, 2016, and KRW 70,000,000,000 on March 10, 2016 according to the instant contract for business transfer and acquisition.

C. Around that time, the Plaintiff issued documents to the Defendant via Nonparty M for the performance of the instant contract for the transfer of business.

However, according to D’s testimony around March 2016, the Defendant appears to have transferred the instant business rights, etc. to Non-Party N corporation around March 2016.

The non-party N transferred all the shares of the non-party company and the non-party company's business rights of this case.

E. The Plaintiff’s intent that “the Defendant transferred the subject matter under the contract for the transfer of business to a third party to transfer the subject matter of the contract for the transfer of the instant case to the effect that the contract for the transfer of the instant case was impossible, and the contract for the transfer of the instant case was cancelled on the grounds of impossibility of performance.” The duplicate of the Plaintiff’s claim on March 29, 2017 and the application for the change of the cause of the claim to the Defendant on April