The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 through 3, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, determined that the instant business contract was terminated due to the Defendant’s reasons attributable to fault, on the ground that: (a) the Defendant’s notification that the period of sale should be postponed after the lapse of eight months after entering into the instant business contract; and (b) the instant notification that the period of sale should be postponed after the lapse of

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable. In so doing, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on binding force of a contract, interpretation of a contract, liability for nonperformance, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations

2. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 4 and 5, the lower court determined that the Defendant is liable to compensate for the penalty, design service cost, asset management entrustment fee, etc. confiscated on the grounds of its stated reasoning, and limited the Defendant’s liability to 50% in consideration of all the circumstances.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable, and there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on the scope of damages and limitation of liability.

The judgment cited in the ground of appeal is different from the case and it is not appropriate to be invoked in this case.

3. 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.