A. On June 22, 2016, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant concluded a sales contract with the content that sold KRW 133 square meters to the Defendant in the amount of KRW 1.5 million in the amount of KRW 1,000,000,000,000 owned by the Plaintiffs (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and the Defendant paid KRW 70,000 to the Plaintiff on the same day.

B. As the Defendant did not pay any balance in violation of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant agreed to pay a penalty of KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff instead of extending the Defendant’s remaining payment date to June 30, 2017, as follows.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant agreement for penalty”). The said agreement for penalty shall be paid 100 million won for the remainder of the land transaction agreement with the non-A and four other parties (the plaintiff; hereinafter the same shall apply) under G main complex development. The said agreement for penalty shall be paid 100 million won.

80 million won shall be paid on May 16, 2017 on the balance date of 20 million won.

20 million won deposit shall be made on May 16, 2017, and a written consent to land use shall also be made on June 30, 2017.

After June 30, 2017, the balance and all documents shall be null and void, and the down payment shall belong to four persons outside A, while the down payment shall belong to the other four persons.

C. Until June 30, 2017, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiffs any balance of KRW 935,000,000 to the Plaintiffs, and the Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit on July 3, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiffs 100 million won and damages for delay for which the plaintiffs seek in accordance with the agreement of the penalty of this case.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant claiming simultaneous performance relations shall pay a penalty of KRW 100 million according to the agreement of this case to the land use consent of the plaintiffs.