1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The grounds for admitting the judgment of the court of first instance, which the Plaintiff asserted in the trial while filing an appeal, are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and the judgment of the court of first instance dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim for damages even if the evidence and the result of pleading submitted in the court of first instance

Therefore, this court's reasoning, including the allegations and evidence of the parties added in the trial, shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, as it is stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the further determination by supplementing the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance as stated in the following

2. The Plaintiff asserts that, considering the progress of the instant project and changes in legal relations surrounding the instant contract, the proviso to Article 8(1) of the instant contract became null and void, and that the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the sale price and the obligation to transfer ownership should be deemed to be in the simultaneous performance relationship. On the premise that the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the sale price and the obligation to transfer ownership should be deemed to be in the simultaneous performance relationship, from the day following the Plaintiff’s payment of the remaining sale price to the Plaintiff, the Defendant is liable for nonperformance due to delay of performance

As a result of a comprehensive examination of the allegations and evidence by the parties, the obligation of the plaintiff to pay the sale price and the obligation of the defendant to transfer ownership to the land of this case cannot be deemed to be in the simultaneous performance relationship, and it cannot be deemed that the defendant's cause is attributable to the delay in the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the plaintiff with respect to the land of this case. The evidence submitted by the plaintiff in the first and the trial of the court of first instance and the grounds for its assertion are not sufficient to recognize different facts

The purport of all the arguments adopted earlier is the whole purport of the arguments.