【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1, 9, 13, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. At the time of the conclusion of the above sales contract, the Plaintiff paid KRW 20,000,000 to the Defendant at the time of the conclusion of the above sales contract, and KRW 17,000,000 after deducting the brokerage commission, etc. for the following day from the Defendant’s request at the C Licensed Real Estate Agent Office, and paid KRW 640,000 to the Defendant, respectively, according to the Defendant’s claim that the brokerage commission is excessive on January 3, 2014, and the Plaintiff was not present at the time of the conclusion of the above sales contract, and the Plaintiff paid the down payment to the Plaintiff’s mother within the same day, while issuing the down payment to the Plaintiff’s mother, and the said sales contract was rescinded because the down payment was not paid.

B. In light of the overall purport of the arguments as a result of the fact-finding inquiry about the Industrial Bank of Korea, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 13-16, Gap evidence Nos. 7 and 12-1, 2, Eul evidence No. 8-8, Eul evidence No. 1-8, Eul evidence No. 1, and the whole purport of the pleadings, the plaintiff was found to have paid the down payment to the defendant until the date of the above sales contract or at least late January 3, 2014, and there is no evidence to prove that the defendant notified the plaintiff of the cancellation of the above sales contract before the down payment

Even if the Defendant had cancelled the above sales contract before that cancellation, the Plaintiff refused to pay the down payment to the Defendant before that cancellation.

There is no assertion or proof that the defendant urged the plaintiff to pay the down payment with a reasonable period of time, and the cancellation is made.