2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff (appointed party) and the plaintiff.

A. On May 7, 2009, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Appointed C (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiffs”) drafted a sales contract with the Defendant on May 7, 2009, stating that the purchase price shall be KRW 50 million for the Defendant’s co-ownership of 3,379/3 of the amount of 1,000 square meters of D forest land in Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and the down payment shall be KRW 50 million at the time of the contract, and the down payment shall be paid at the time of the contract; KRW 200 million in the intermediate payment shall be paid at KRW 50 million on May 16, 2009; and the remainder of KRW 200 million shall be paid at the time of transfer of ownership.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant sales contract”) under the said sales contract.

The Plaintiffs paid KRW 50 million to E on May 8, 2009 pursuant to the above sales contract, and transferred KRW 200 million out of the intermediate payment to the account under the name of the Defendant on May 20, 2009.

C. The instant real estate is located within the area subject to permission for land transaction contracts under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. At the time when the plaintiffs asserted that they had arranged for the instant sales contract with the defendant at the time of entering into the instant sales contract with the defendant, the defendant and Eul would later allow the plaintiff to develop the instant real estate area as a residential area and obtain land transaction permission, but the defendant refused to cooperate with an application for land transaction permission while it is difficult to promote a residential development project. The instant sales contract was finally invalidated by clearly expressing the defendant's intent to refuse to comply with the obligation to cooperate with the application for land transaction permission under the dynamic invalidation.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to return 250 million won paid by the plaintiffs to the purchase price of this case as unjust enrichment.

In addition, the Plaintiffs, even if they purchased the instant real estate from the Defendant.