The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to Article 3 of the Trial of Small Claims Act, with respect to small claims, an appeal may be filed only against “when a judgment as to whether or not any statute, order, rule or disposition has been violated and whether or not any order, rule or disposition has been violated is unreasonable” (Article 1) or “when a judgment contrary to the precedents of the Supreme Court has been rendered” (Article 2).

Here, “when the Supreme Court makes a decision contrary to the Supreme Court’s precedents” refers to a case where the Supreme Court makes an interpretation contrary to the Supreme Court’s decisions on the interpretation of statutes applicable to specific cases, and the grounds for violation of statutes, such as simple misunderstanding of legal principles, violation of the

In addition, "the decision of the Supreme Court on the interpretation of Acts and subordinate statutes applicable to a specific case" means the decision of the Supreme Court which has made a defined interpretation on all or part of the provisions of the Acts and subordinate statutes applicable to a specific case, and "the interpretation conflicting with the original decision" means the case where the Supreme Court has made a decision on the application of the provisions of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the relevant case on the premise of the interpretation opposite or opposing interpretation

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da6979, 6986 delivered on May 13, 2004, etc.). Furthermore, in order to file an appeal on the grounds that the Supreme Court rendered conflicting judgments with respect to small claims under Article 3 subparag. 2 of the Trial of Small Claims Act, Article 8 of the Trial Rules of Small Claims and Article 131 of the Rules of Civil Procedure must specify what parts of the judgment below conflict with the Supreme Court’s precedents and specify the Supreme Court’s precedents in detail.

(2) On May 15, 2008, the gist of the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal is as follows: (a) the lower judgment violated the rules of evidence by disregarding a criminal or civil judgment related to the instant case; and (b) the Franchising project.