The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court dismissed all of the Plaintiff’s primary claim and conjunctive claim premised on the premise that the Plaintiff was legally succeeded to the buyer’s status under the instant sales contract, on the following grounds: (a) even if the sales contract was concluded with the Defendant to purchase the instant site (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and the Plaintiff comprehensively transferred the buyer’s status to the Plaintiff; (b) on the sole basis of the contract clause stipulating that “if the purchaser is changed in the name of the purchaser, such as the progress of the business or the change of the business, etc. after the conclusion of the contract, the seller permits the transfer of the purchaser’s status,” which was included in the instant sales contract, does not mean that the Defendant comprehensively consented to or consented to the transfer of the purchaser status.

In light of the records, although the reasoning of the judgment below is partially inappropriate, such conclusion of the court below is acceptable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, thereby exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.