A. The Defendants are co-owners who have acquired each share of 1/2 of the instant real estate residential facilities located in Suwon-gu, Busan and a 332m2m2 and its ground reinforced concrete and the mentment mentmen’s mentmen’s mentmen’s lux roof (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On April 23, 201, the Plaintiff purchased the instant real estate in KRW 800,000,000 from the purchase price, and concluded a sales contract with the effect that KRW 20,000,000 of the intermediate payment on the day, the intermediate payment of KRW 60,000 on April 26, 201, the intermediate payment of KRW 100,000,000 from May 23, 201, the remainder payment of KRW 620,000 from the remainder payment of KRW 620,00 on June 23, 2011.

In the event of nonperformance under Article 6 of the sales contract of this case, the amount of the down payment shall be determined as the estimated amount of damages.

C. On April 23, 2011, the Plaintiff paid down payment of KRW 20,000,000 to Nonparty E.

On September 19, 2011, the Defendants concluded a sales contract with Nonparty F for the instant real estate, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with Nonparty F for the instant real estate on November 16, 201.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 10 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Although the Plaintiff’s assertion concluded the instant sales contract with the Plaintiff, the Defendants transferred the ownership of the instant real estate to F. As such, the Defendants should pay to the Plaintiff KRW 20,000,000, a double of the down payment due to the return of each down payment and the nonperformance of obligation, and damages for delay from the date of conclusion of the instant sales contract.

B. In full view of the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings in the testimony of the witness E before the claim against the defendant 1 E, the defendant C has the authority to conclude the instant sales contract on behalf of the defendant C, since it is recognized that the defendant C conferred the power to execute the instant sales contract on behalf of the defendant C.

Therefore, Defendant C is subject to the instant sales contract.