A. The Plaintiffs are the executor of the construction project of the D Apartment-gu Seoul Urban Development Zone B in Gyeyang-gu, Yongsan-gu (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. On May 19, 2008, the Defendant entered into a contract under which 505/704 of the instant apartment units were sold from the Plaintiffs to 697,40,000 of the sales price (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

C. The Plaintiffs and the Defendant also drafted an additional contract on May 19, 2008, and the main contents related to the instant case are as follows.

(1) With respect to the interest on loans of the first, second, and third-time part payments in total six occasions, the Plaintiffs shall pay the interest on the loans of the first, second, and third-time part payments up to the day prior to the date on which the occupancy is designated, and the Defendant shall reimburse the Plaintiffs in advance, and the interest accrued from the date when the occupancy is designated shall be borne by the Defendant.

(2) With respect to the interest on three-time loans of the intermediate payment 4, 5, and 6-time loans, the Plaintiffs shall pay it on behalf of the Plaintiffs up to the day preceding the beginning date of the designation of the occupancy, and the interest accrued from the beginning date of the designation

The Plaintiffs publicly announced the period for designating the occupancy of the instant apartment from October 31, 2010 to December 31, 2010 to the Defendant, but the Defendant did not pay the remainder of the apartment sale without moving-out even after the expiration date of the designation period.

Therefore, the Plaintiffs notified the Defendant of the rescission of the instant sales contract through the peremptory notice of performance, and the contract was lawfully rescinded on May 22, 2013.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 4, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Assertion and determination

A. (1) Penalty: 69,740,00 won was recognized, and the sales contract of this case was cancelled due to the Defendant’s failure to pay the remainder, so the Defendant shall compensate the Plaintiffs for the damages.

Therefore, the defendant's contract for the sale of this case was rescinded by false or exaggerated advertising of the plaintiffs.