1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The plaintiff is the first Daegu Dong-gu.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the pertinent part is modified or added as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts used or added;

A. Of the judgment of the first instance, the first instance court stated that ① “the Plaintiff” in the first instance part No. 10 in the third part is “the Defendant”; ② the third part 20, and 21 of the third part “the sales contract must have a specific and conclusive agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter of the sale and the price thereof,” and the third part 7 of the fourth part is “to return to this case, and to spam, in light of the above legal principles, and to spam,” respectively.

B. On the third and third sides of the judgment of the court of first instance, the following is added.

“In order to establish a contract, the agreement between the parties is required to be reached, and such agreement is not required with respect to all matters that form the content of the contract in question, but there is a specific agreement with respect to its essential matters or important matters, or at least an agreement with respect to the standards, methods, etc. that may specify the future in detail. On the other hand, if the parties fail to reach an agreement with respect to matters that the agreement should be reached, the contract shall be deemed not to have been concluded, barring any special circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 200Da51650, Mar. 23, 2001).”

C. On the fourth side of the first instance judgment, the following matters shall be added to the front and rear of the first instance judgment.

[On the other hand, according to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 9 through 11, the money prepared by the plaintiff as of June 24, 2015 that the plaintiff claimed that the plaintiff provided the defendant with the full payment of the purchase price (=the total amount of KRW 152,864,157 (i.e., the balance in the plaintiff's account under the name of 58,875,117) shall be 455.