2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On May 6, 2013, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract with respect to D and the instant real estate on behalf of the owners of the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), including the Defendants, for which KRW 1.45 million was paid, and KRW 20 million was paid to D on the date of concluding the contract, KRW 80 million on the date of concluding the contract, KRW 80 million on May 16, 2013, and KRW 1.350 million in the balance, to be paid within one month after the building permit was granted (hereinafter “instant contract”), and paid KRW 20 million in the name of the provisional contract, as the date of concluding the contract.

Article 4 of the contract of this case provides that "When the seller has performed the contract in good faith, he shall compensate the buyer for the amount double the down payment, and when the buyer has performed the contract in good faith, this contract shall be null and void and shall not claim the return of the down payment."

B. On May 16, 2013, the Plaintiff did not pay the down payment. On October 15, 2013, the Plaintiff sent to the seller under the instant contract a certificate of content that “In entering into the instant contract, the Plaintiff planned to build a hotel with a height of eight stories on the instant real estate surface, and as the seller’s representative was well aware of this fact and sent to the Plaintiff a design review report, even if it is confirmed that the construction of a hotel is impossible, the seller’s representative was also able to pay KRW 40,000,000 as the double payment of the provisional contract.”

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 3, the purport of whole pleading

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. While the Plaintiff purchased the land and displayed a site for the purpose of constructing a hotel, the Plaintiff entered into the instant contract by explaining that D, representing the Defendants, can construct a hotel with the 10th floor scale on the instant real estate, and the Plaintiff was unable to construct a building with the 6th floor or higher on the instant real estate. As such, the Plaintiff revoked the instant contract on the ground of deception or mistake.