2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff alleged by the parties that the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to cancel the instant sales contract on April 20, 2015, because the Defendant did not enter into an oral agreement with 15 households of the instant building at least 100% at the end of the outstanding payment date or at the latest until March 31, 2015, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to cancel the instant sales contract on April 20, 2015. The Defendant agreed to return the down payment of KRW 55 million to the Plaintiff by August 3, 2015, that the Defendant is liable to pay the amount stated in the purport of the claim to the Plaintiff.

As to this, the Defendant agreed to change the remainder payment date according to the progress of the lease of the instant building at the time of the instant sales contract, and did not have agreed to be responsible for the Defendant and to complete the lease of 100%. Thus, the Defendant may cancel the instant sales contract and confiscate the down payment on the ground that the Plaintiff did not complete the lease of the instant building at 100%. As such, the Defendant continued to request the Plaintiff to cancel the contract and return the down payment on the ground that the lease of the instant building was not completed by the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant again sold the instant real estate to a third party and agreed to return the down payment to the Plaintiff by receiving the purchase price from a third party. At the time of the formation of the agreement on April 20, 2015, the Defendant omitted the statement to the effect that the down payment is to be returned by the Defendant’s real estate broker to a third party, and the actual sale of the instant building to a third party on January 20, 2016.

B. The Plaintiff shall be deemed to have added the purport of the entire pleadings to the written evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 1 and 2.