1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On April 29, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a share acquisition agreement with the Defendant to purchase KRW 3,800,000 per share of 40 common share (hereinafter “instant shares”) that is 5,000,000, per share of 152,000 common share (hereinafter “instant shares”), through telephone, text message, and e-mail with the Defendant. The Plaintiff transferred the down payment KRW 15,200,000 on the same day to the Defendant’s account.

However, the Defendant unilaterally notified the Plaintiff of the rescission of the contract by simple and abstract judgment, and at the time, the Plaintiff had already concluded a contract to sell the instant shares to C and D in KRW 140,000.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 15,200,000,000, which is a penalty for breach of contract pursuant to Article 565 of the Civil Act, with the remainder of KRW 15,200,000, which is an indirect damage, paid by the Plaintiff to C and D as penalty.

2. Determination as to whether to conclude a contract

A. For the purpose of the formation of a contract, the objective agreement between the parties is required for the agreement of several conflicting declarations, and there is an objective agreement, all of the matters expressed in the parties’ declaration of intent should be the same. On the other hand, even if the contents of the contract are not "important" and the objective elements of the contract, if the parties expressed their intent with the intent of significant importance and as a requirement for the formation of the contract, the contract is lawful and effective only when the agreement is reached.

In addition, an offer, which is a legal requirement for the formation of a contract, must be specific and conclusive that the contract is concluded immediately if the offer accepts the offer. Therefore, it is necessary to include matters to the extent that the contents of the contract can be determined.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da53059 delivered on April 11, 2003, etc.). B.

According to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, ① Won and the defendant on April 29, 2015.