1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows. Thus, this court’s reasoning is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for partial revision as follows. Thus, this is acceptable pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

[In the first instance trial, the Plaintiff’s conjunctive assertion that the contract for the transfer of the business of this case loses its validity due to the fulfillment of the terms of termination of the contract, and if the contract for the transfer of the business of this case is not effective, the Defendant withdraws all of the second preliminary assertion that the contract for the transfer of the business of this case shall perform all obligations in accordance with the terms of the contract for the transfer of the business of this case. Thus, the part of the first instance judgment (No. 5-17, No. 10, No. 10, No. 23, No. 24, No. 16) of the first instance judgment and No. 9, No. 15 of the first instance judgment, “The above court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on July 25, 2018,” and the Plaintiff appealed against the second instance judgment, and received a decision that the effect of the disposition of the revocation

o Article 30(2) of the Medical Service Act (wholly amended by Act No. 8366 of Apr. 11, 2007) provides that “Article 30(2) of the Medical Service Act” shall be “Article 30(2) of the Medical Service Act (wholly amended by Act No. 8366 of Apr. 11, 2007), and Article 30(2) of the Medical Service Act of 18 shall be respectively dismissed “Article 33(2) of the Medical Service Act.”

o The following shall be added to not more than 9 pages 23 of the first instance court judgment:

“The Plaintiff is obligated to cooperate with the formulation of the repayment plan, and the Plaintiff did not perform its duty to cooperate in the establishment of the plan for repayment after the amount to be recovered pursuant to the instant contract for the transfer of business became final and conclusive. The Plaintiff did not perform its duty despite having decided to deposit all of the remaining profits after deducting some expenses from the total sales of the instant hospital in the name of K until the repayment plan is determined. The Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the performance of its duty on August 21, 2014, and the Defendant gave notice within two weeks.