1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On April 1, 2015, the Defendant and Nonparty D entered into a contract for business and mutual transfer with Nonparty E, F, and G to transfer the Plaintiff Company’s land, building, patent and permission, trade names, corporations, existing facilities, business rights, etc., as agreed upon by April 1, 2015 to KRW 340,000,000 (20,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) as agreed by April 1, 2015, “the transferor” under Article 4(2) of the contract must pay it when there occurs contingent bonds not agreed with the transferee.

(hereinafter “instant transfer contract”. The Defendant received KRW 200 million out of the down payment and the remainder, according to the instant transfer contract, KRW 50 million.

B. On November 3, 2015, the Plaintiff prepared a letter of payment (hereinafter “instant letter of payment”) with the Defendant stating that the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 50 million to the Defendant in installments, on November 30, 2015, by providing that “the full amount of postal bonds” related to the instant transfer contract shall be deducted with the Defendant, and that the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 20 million to the Defendant, and that the payment shall be paid in installments as KRW 30 million on December 30, 2015 (hereinafter “instant letter of payment”).

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

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the claim is that the Defendant transferred the Plaintiff Company’s business without supplying the materials even though it received KRW 20,790,000 as advance payment for the government-funded materials for H construction before entering into the instant transfer contract, and thereafter the Plaintiff supplied the materials.

This constitutes contingent liability, and the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the agreed amount of KRW 20,790,000 and damages for delay in accordance with the agreement at the time of the transfer contract of this case.

B. According to the facts acknowledged earlier, the transferee of the instant transfer contract is not the Plaintiff but the Nonparty E, etc., so the Plaintiff cannot directly exercise his right to the Defendant with respect to the foreign debt, etc. under the instant transfer contract, and it is deemed that in light of the content of the instant payment rejection.