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 this court’s reasoning for accepting the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of the part of 10-12(c) of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. As such, this is cited by the main text of Article 420

[Attachment]

C. On May 20, 2010, the following circumstances are acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the facts acknowledged as above, the evidence mentioned above and the purport of Gap evidence as a whole, namely, ① there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendants informed the Plaintiff that an individual, not a corporation, could not directly enter into a franchise agreement with the department store; ② According to the instant contract, the Plaintiff deemed the Plaintiff to enter into the instant franchise agreement with the non-party company at the same time and pay consulting services, etc. to the Defendant start-up business entity. The obligation of the Defendant start-up business entity to enter into a franchise agreement (transfer of rights) or a franchise agreement (entrusted operation agreement) with the non-party company at the time of conclusion. The Plaintiff entered into the instant investment agreement with the non-party company on the nature of the franchise agreement or the consignment operation agreement with the non-party company. Accordingly, the Plaintiff could not be aware of any confidential information between the non-party company and the non-party company and the non-party company’s obligation to comply with the instant investment agreement.