2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. On June 26, 2013, the Defendant entered into a housing sale contract with the Korea Land and Housing Corporation for the supply price of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”) to be newly constructed in a residential environment improvement project zone D (hereinafter “instant apartment”) as KRW 245,793,000 between the Korea Land and Housing Corporation and the Korea Land and Housing Corporation. On July 29, 2013, the supply price was reduced to KRW 17,936,00 by 227,857,000 as the supply price was reflected in the gratuitous concession of the State and public land.

B. According to the instant sales contract, the Defendant paid each of the intermediate payment of KRW 36,00,000 to the Korea Land and Housing Corporation on June 26, 2013, KRW 24,000,000, KRW 36,000 in the first intermediate payment on July 30, 2014, and KRW 36,000 in the second intermediate payment on June 30, 2015, and currently remains 131,857,000 in the remainder.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant, on June 26, 2013, transferred the status of the buyer of the instant apartment to KRW 42,100,000 between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant resale contract”).

(2) Since the Defendant concluded the resale contract of this case, it cannot be deemed that the resale contract of this case was established in a conclusive sense that the Plaintiff and the Defendant would transfer the status of the buyer of the apartment of this case between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and even if the resale contract of this case was established in a conclusive sense, the resale contract of this case is invalid as an unfair legal act, as an important part of the contract, or as a mistake in the important part of the contract, or by deception and coercion of the Plaintiff.