1. The part of the claim for nullification of the sales contract among the instant lawsuit is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 22, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract to sell the instant fishery right to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

The main contents are as follows:

The purchase price: 540 million won: the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff the down payment of KRW 57 million on the day of the contract ( October 22, 2015), KRW 168 million out of the balance of KRW 483 million paid on the day of the contract, to the Plaintiff, KRW 10,000,000,000 for policy loan obligations of the Plaintiff D Association (E Association) and KRW 50,000,000 for general loan obligations of the Plaintiff on October 28, 2015, instead of having the Defendant repaid the Plaintiff’s remainder of KRW 315,00,000,000,000,000 out of the remainder of KRW 315,000,000 to the Plaintiff until the end of October 2015, 2016.

B. On October 22, 2015, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff a down payment of KRW 57 million, and the remainder of KRW 315 million on November 30, 2015, respectively. On October 28, 2015, the Defendant separately paid KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff instead of paying the general loan obligations of KRW 50 million.

C. On December 22, 2016, the Defendant filed a lawsuit with the Plaintiff seeking the implementation of the transfer of ownership registration procedure based on the sale and purchase of the instant fishery right (Seoul District Court Jinwon Branch 2016Gahap11977), and the Plaintiff asserted that the instant sales contract was rescinded by notifying the Defendant of the cancellation as the Plaintiff did not pay the said KRW 118 million.

On September 14, 2017, the above court accepted the defendant's claim on the grounds that the notification of cancellation cannot be recognized as effective, which became final and conclusive on June 29, 2018 through the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2017Na23045) and the final appeal (Supreme Court 2018Da230120).

(hereinafter referred to as “related litigation”) D.

On July 13, 2018, the defendant completed the transfer of ownership on the fishery right of this case on the grounds of the confirmation of related litigation.

[Ground of Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul No. 1.