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

A. On September 15, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant’s spouse C on the share of KRW 1537,679 (hereinafter “the share of the instant real estate”), among D forest land owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”), with the purchase price of KRW 69,750,000,000, the Plaintiff agreed to receive KRW 10,000 as of the date of the contract, the intermediate payment of KRW 20,00,000 on the date of the contract, and the intermediate payment of KRW 39,750,000 on October 30, 2015. < Amended by Act No. 13573, Dec. 30, 2015>

(hereinafter, this case’s sales contract). B

On October 27, 2015, the Plaintiff drafted a sales contract with respect to the instant real estate at the Defendant’s request, which is KRW 111,60,000 (a contractual deposit of KRW 69,00,000,000) for the remainder of KRW 42,60,000,000, when entering into the contract, the Plaintiff entered into the sales contract, which is the condition under which each payment is made on October 27, 2015).

(hereinafter, this case’s sales contract is called a sales contract).

On October 27, 2015, the Plaintiff received each copy of the certificate of personal seal impression stating “E” and “D only” in the column for the purpose of use, and one copy of the certificate of personal seal impression stating “D transfer confirmation” in the column for the purpose of use, and issued it to the Defendant along with the certificate of personal seal impression. The instant real estate share was registered in Nonparty E’s name on October 30, 2015.

C On September 15, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 10,000,00 as down payment under the instant sales contract, and KRW 59,00,00,000 as the intermediate payment and the remainder payment on October 27, 2015, as each account transfer.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4, 6, 7, and the result of the response to financial transaction information and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's primary assertion and judgment are primarily based on the plaintiff's primary assertion and judgment, in violation of the Licensed Real Estate Agent Business Act without the defendant's qualification as a licensed real estate agent, and the one sales contract of this case was mediated with C, and without authority, the plaintiff's qualification as an agent is ambiguous