2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. On September 27, 2012, the Plaintiff completed each registration of ownership transfer for each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1, 1, 2, and 2 (hereinafter “each of the instant land”) on the grounds of voluntary auction, and completed registration of ownership transfer for the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant building”) on May 14, 2013.

B. On May 2013, C representing the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant’s husband D who represented the Defendant, and the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant to sell each of the instant land and buildings (hereinafter “instant real estate”) for KRW 1.3 billion (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

The instant building was constructed by E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) supplied materials, such as steel bars, from F (hereinafter “F”), etc. at the time of entering into the instant sales contract. At the time of entering into the instant sales contract, the payment of KRW 572 million out of the purchase price of KRW 1.3 billion is replaced by removing the material payment liability for EF. The payment of KRW 728 million, including the receipt of the obligation to return the lease deposit for the instant building, was determined to be performed at the time of bank loans and the transfer of ownership on May 29, 2013.

C. On May 29, 2013, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the grounds of sale as of May 5, 2013 to the Defendant. As to each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 25469, May 29, 2013; as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 25469, May 29, 2013; and as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 25470, May 29, 2013, respectively.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 5, 19, 20, and 27 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance on the instant safety defense is the same as the judgment on the instant safety defense, and thus, it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.