A. On June 10, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) between C and C to sell a building E (Ctain and 38.19 square meters of the parcelling-out area) at KRW 144,037,470 of the parcelling-out price to C (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

B. According to the instant sales contract, C is obligated to divide the sales price into down payment, KRW 14,40,740 as down payment, the first intermediate payment on August 1, 2016, the second intermediate payment on December 12 of the same year, the third intermediate payment on April 3, 2017, and the same year.

8. As of the fourth intermediate payment, the fifth intermediate payment, and the sixth intermediate payment on March 6, 2018, each of 14,403,740 won shall be paid for the remainder, and 43,21,220 won shall be paid for the remainder, and the late payment shall be paid for the late payment calculated at the rate of 17% per annum in the event that the payment of the purchase price is delayed.

C. On December 27, 2018, the Defendant acquired the status of the buyer under the instant sales contract from C to the Plaintiff.

However, the Defendant paid 14,40,740, the remainder 43,211,220 won to the Plaintiff. The Defendant paid 8,656,845, and 765,110, respectively, for the Defendant, paid 133,380 won of property tax on behalf of the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 67,170,295 (the amount of KRW 14,403,740 + the amount of KRW 43,211,20 + the amount of late interest 8,656,845 + the amount of KRW 765,110 + the amount of indemnity equivalent to the property tax + the amount of KRW 133,380 + the amount of delay damages calculated at the rate of 17% per annum, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, from November 30, 2019 to the day of full payment.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.