1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation of this case is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff’s assertion presented in this court is identical to the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for adding the judgment identical to that of paragraph (2) to the Plaintiff’s assertion presented in this court; and (b) thus, it

(The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff are not significantly different from the allegations in the first instance court, and the fact-finding and decision of the first instance court are justifiable in light of the comprehensive examination of the evidence and materials submitted in addition to this court.

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) During the period from August 30, 2016 to November 15, 2016, the Defendant’s employees G, operated by the Defendant, worked in F, and sold the original product under the name of F, thereby failing to perform the contractual obligation under which the Defendant would transfer the entire business to the Plaintiff. As such, the Plaintiff is not obligated to pay the acquisition price to the Plaintiff. 2) As the purpose of the instant transfer contract called “merger of the company” was impossible to achieve, the Defendant is not entitled to seek payment under the transfer contract, and therefore, compulsory execution based on the instant authentic deed prepared to secure the execution of the said transfer contract should be denied.

B. Determination 1) We examine the following facts: (a) it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant failed to perform his/her duty under a transfer contract only with each statement of evidence Nos. 13-22; and (b) the Plaintiff did not pay the down payment of KRW 30 million to the Defendant until August 31, 2016; and (c) the fact that the E employees did not pay wages even though they worked in F. As seen earlier, insofar as the Plaintiff did not perform their contractual duty first, even if the Plaintiff alleged the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff may not refuse to perform his/her duty. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s assertion cannot be accepted.) Meanwhile, the purpose of the transfer contract of this case is the transfer contract of this case.