2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On April 18, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to purchase the purchase price of KRW 900,000,000 for the land and factory owned by the Defendant and the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”) and the main contents are as follows.

30,000,000 won: The seller shall pay on the date of the contract, and the intermediate payment of KRW 770,00,000: The sum paid on May 3, 2013: 100,000: The buyer may reimburse double the down payment until he pays the intermediate payment to the seller, and the buyer may rescind this contract by giving up the down payment, until he pays the intermediate payment to the seller.

B. On April 18, 2013, the Plaintiff paid a down payment of KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant, but did not pay the intermediate payment on May 3, 2013, the intermediate payment date.

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

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the intermediate payment was demanded by the Defendant to provide personal security (guarantee) instead of the obligation under the instant contract to the Plaintiff on the date of intermediate payment, and the contract was rescinded. As such, the Defendant is obligated to refund KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant, as compensation for damages arising

(1) The plaintiff asserted that the defendant should pay KRW 60,000,000, which is a part of the down payment, and claimed the above KRW 30,000 as a part of the claim.

Judgment

In order to terminate a contract on the ground of non-performance, it is necessary to provide the other party with performance or performance of his/her obligation together with the other party’s delay or performance impossibility. In full view of the aforementioned evidence, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is recognized, in view of the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the evidence, basic facts and evidence Nos. 3, No. 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6, witness D’s testimony, inquiry results with respect to new banks in this court, and the purport of the entire argument.