A. On October 16, 2012, the Plaintiffs entered into a land sale agreement with the Defendant on a temporary partition of 6524 square meters out of the Dongyang-gun D Forest land owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “non-party company”) on behalf of the Defendant (hereinafter “non-party company”) with the purchase price of KRW 87,20,000, and KRW 87,200,000, and KRW 6351,00,000, of the non-party forest land owned by a temporary partition of KRW 43,60,00,000.

(hereinafter the above land sale contract is “the instant sales contract,” and the above subject matter of sale is “each of the instant land”). B.

Plaintiff

A remitted to Nonparty Company KRW 8 million on October 13, 2012, and KRW 122,50,000 on October 16, 2012, respectively.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 and 2 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs asserted that they concluded the instant sales contract with the non-party company, which is a legitimate representative of the defendant, and paid 130,800,000 won in full.

However, as the Defendant did not accept the registration of ownership transfer, the instant sales contract shall be cancelled through the service of the duplicate of the complaint, and the Defendant shall return the purchase price to the Plaintiffs.

B. The Defendant asserted that he concluded a sales agency contract with the non-party company, but the non-party company was authorized to act as an agent for the sales contract until December 2011.

In addition, there is no authority to act as an agent for each of the lands in this case.

Therefore, since the plaintiffs entered into a contract with a unauthorized agent, the defendant is not obligated to return the purchase price to the plaintiffs.

C. 1) We examine whether the non-party company was authorized to conclude a sales contract with the plaintiffs on behalf of the defendant for the non-party company of this case. In full view of the evidence (including paper numbers), evidence Nos. 4, 7, 8, 9 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3, witness F, the whole purport of pleading in the witness F, the defendant is related to the sale and purchase of the land list separately attached to the non-party company on May 16, 201.