A. On March 27, 2014, the Plaintiff completed registration of ownership preservation in the name of the Plaintiff regarding the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On May 7, 2014, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract with the Defendant to sell the instant real estate amounting to KRW 120 million (hereinafter “instant contract”).

C. On May 8, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant real estate under Article 21020 of the Seogpo District Court’s receipt registry office, and received 70 million won out of the purchase price from the Defendant.

On August 28, 2014, the Plaintiff urged the Defendant to pay the remainder of KRW 50 million, and demanded the payment of the remainder again by content-certified mail. On August 31, 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the demand for restitution by August 31, 2014, and the notification reached the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry in Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, even though the Defendant received the notice to pay the remainder of the contract of this case from the Plaintiff, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 50 million within a reasonable period of time. As such, the grounds for rescission of the contract of this case arose. The mail proving contents of August 28, 2014, which included the Plaintiff’s notice to pay the remainder of the contract of this case and the intent to cancel the contract of this case, reached the Defendant. As such, the contract of this case was lawfully rescinded on September 2014, for a considerable period of time thereafter.

(A) As the Plaintiff’s expression of intent to cancel the instant contract is apparent in the record that the duplicate of the instant complaint was served on the Defendant on November 7, 2014, the instant sales contract was lawfully rescinded at the latest on November 7, 2014. Therefore, the Defendant rescinded the instant contract to the Plaintiff.