1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. On December 2012, the Plaintiff agreed to pay 50% of the profits earned by the Plaintiff from the supply of food materials to C expressway stops from around December 2012, when the Plaintiff supplied food materials, such as rain, etc. to C expressway stops (hereinafter “C expressway stops”), that the Defendant’s office is a company that manufactures food materials, such as rain, etc. in the national expressway resting area, and that the Defendant operates it to other resting areas and supplies food materials, such as rain, etc., inasmuch as the Defendant’s office is in D’s business operations, and that the Defendant retires, upon the Defendant’s retirement, paid 50% of the profits earned from the supply of food materials, etc. by D’s convenience, under the condition that D’s right to operate the food materials, etc., from the time of the Defendant’s retirement from office, the Defendant did not supply food materials, etc. to the Defendant, but did not acquire the right to operate the expressway operated by D from 100 to 250,201.

However, since each evidence of the plaintiff's submission and some testimony of the witness E are insufficient to recognize it, the above assertion is without merit and the plaintiff's claim is without merit without any need to further examine the remainder, such as the amount of damages.

[1] The reasons are as follows. ① The Plaintiff initially and verbally agreed with the Defendant under the above conditions, and at that time, Nonparty E, his father, was an agreement with the Defendant on behalf of the Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff. However, in full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in witness E’s testimony, the Plaintiff’s father (the Plaintiff’s father, the Nonparty, from around 1996 to August 201, 201, i.e., the Plaintiff’s father (the Plaintiff’s father, the Plaintiff) is a stock company F, which performs the work