1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On August 15, 201, the Plaintiff’s assertion C, the Defendant, and D agreed to carry on the business at the rate of 325%, Defendant 45%, and D 30% shares, and accordingly, established and operated E in the Republic of Korea to the Republic of Korea local area.

After that, the plaintiff paid KRW 42 million and acquired all of the shares of the above C.

However, even though the defendant requested that the plaintiff read the documentary evidence of the above company's settlement of accounts and the expenditure of funds, and inform the company's total assets and debts.

Since this is an act in violation of Article 3 of the same business contract, the plaintiff terminates the same business contract in accordance with Article 8 of the same business contract with the service of the complaint of this case and claims the return of the investment amount of KRW 42 million.

2. Determination C, the Defendant, and D agreed to conduct a business on August 15, 201 with C25%, Defendant 45%, and D 30% shares in the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “instant partnership agreement”), thereby establishing and operating a local corporation E in the Philippines. The fact that the Plaintiff paid KRW 42 million to the Plaintiff and acquired the entire shares of the said C is no dispute between the parties.

However, in the partnership agreement, such as the partnership agreement, a request for dissolution of the partnership, withdrawal from the partnership, or expulsion of other union members can only be made, and the other party cannot be obliged to cancel the partnership agreement and to recover from its original state due to the cancellation of the partnership agreement as in the general contract.

(See Supreme Court Decision 94Da7157 delivered on May 13, 1994). If the plaintiff's above assertion is based on the premise that the plaintiff succeeded to or succeeded to the status of a member under the agreement of the same trade of this case and the status of a member of the same trade of this case, according to the evidence No. 1, Article 4 of the agreement of this case provides that "the three operators of the same trade of this case shall not transfer, transfer, or dispose of their rights or obligations under this contract to any other third party for any reason, except with the written consent of the other party."