1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The grounds for this part of the facts of recognition are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, unless there are special circumstances, Defendant C’s list against the plaintiffs

1. As to each one-half portion of the real estate mentioned above, the defendant D shall set forth in the annexed list;

2. to 2.

6. Each one-half of the registered real estate shall be liable to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration on September 23, 2016, respectively;

3. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. At the time of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiffs and the Defendants agreed to report the purchase price as KRW 54 million. However, the Plaintiffs voluntarily prepared a written contract (Evidence A 2-1) stating the purchase price as KRW 94 billion and demanded the Plaintiffs to report it as the purchase price. This constitutes a non-performance, and the Defendants rescinded the instant sales contract on the ground of non-performance. 2) Even if it is difficult to recognize the Plaintiffs’ intent to refuse performance, it is difficult to recognize the Plaintiffs’ intent to refuse performance.

However, even if the Defendants notified the Plaintiffs to perform the obligation to pay any balance under the conditions as necessary for the registration of transfer of ownership, it constitutes a delay of performance, and the instant sales contract was lawfully rescinded by delivery of the content certification as of November 18, 2016.

B. In the case of the cancellation of a contract due to the rescission of a contract due to the non-performance as to the refusal of performance, the requirements for the cancellation of contract are mitigated when compared with the cancellation of contract at the time of the delay of performance because the other party's peremptory notice and the other party's offer for the performance of one's own obligation related to the simultaneous performance is not required. Thus, in addition to the case of explicitly expressing his intention of refusal of performance