beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the reasoning of the judgment is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, the reasoning of the judgment is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The addition;
A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion on the assertion regarding Article 5 of the instant acquisition agreement 1) The Plaintiff asserts that the instant acquisition agreement was automatically rescinded pursuant to Article 5, on the grounds as set out in the following, even in the court: (a) insofar as the Defendant transferred the conditional permission right of electric display to the Plaintiff on the condition that the Defendant did not file a civil petition with the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff does not perform all the obligations under the instant acquisition agreement.
B) In full view of the evidence Nos. 8 and the purport of the entire pleadings as to the claim No. 2 of the transfer contract of this case as to the cancellation of the right to permission of the electronic sign board, even if the Plaintiff’s negligence was involved in the process of acquiring the right to permission of the electronic sign board, it is reasonable for the Defendant to assume the responsibility under Article 5 of the transfer contract of this case as to the cancellation of the right to permission of the electronic sign board since the Plaintiff’s negligence was the Defendant’s contractual obligation. 2) The contents of the permission (No. 2) with the contents of the permission to change the existing type of LED electronic sign board on the rooftop of the permitted building of this case into the LED electronic sign board form shall be set up lawfully in the relevant laws, etc., and if there was any change, it is merely a content of the permission (the report to be received) in advance, and the head of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the head of the Gu, on December 13, 2011, revoked the permission of this case on the ground of this case.