1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On October 30, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for acquisition and transfer of the right of KRW 48,000,000 for premium (hereinafter “instant premium contract”) on the Gyeyang-gu and the first floor D (hereinafter “instant car page”) in Gyeyang-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant premium contract”).

B. On the same day, the Plaintiff concluded a lease contract of KRW 15,00,000 with respect to the Gyeyang-gu and the first floor building (hereinafter “instant store”) in Incheon City, Gyeyang-gu, and the first floor building (hereinafter “instant store”).

C. Under the premium contract of this case, the Plaintiff paid the premium to the Defendant, and the Defendant transferred the instant car page to the Plaintiff.

Since then, on November 13, 2018, the Plaintiff reported general restaurant business (business of cooking and selling food, where drinking accompanied with meals is allowed) on November 13, 2018, and started operating the instant carpet, but it was found that the instant building was an unauthorized building through a due diligence conducted by a public official in charge of the competent Gu office and thereby preventing the instant carpet from running. As such, the Plaintiff reported the closure of business on December 5, 2018.

E. The Plaintiff is moving to the underground floor of the building where the instant store is located and runs a business as “D”.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 1 through 5, Eul's statement and video (if there are various numbers, including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of whole pleading

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was not an “C1st floor” as indicated in the instant premium contract, but an unauthorized building located in the “F1st floor” attached to the said building.

The defendant knew or could have known that the store of this case was an unauthorized building while operating the car page of this case, and the defendant, the transferor of the premium contract of this case, obtained continuous business permission from the location of the car page of this case.