1. The part concerning the claim for cancellation of the sales contract among the instant lawsuit is dismissed.

2. The defendant shall pay 185,000,000 won to the plaintiff and this shall apply.

1. Indication of claims: To describe the causes of claims in attached Form and the amended causes of claims as follows;

2. Judgment by public notice: Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. As to the claim for revocation, the Plaintiff asserted that the sales contract concluded with respect to the instant real estate was made by the Defendant’s deception or the Plaintiff’s mistake, and that the Defendant should return the purchase price to the Plaintiff as restitution. In addition, the Plaintiff amended the purport of the claim as stated in June 22, 2018, stating that “the revocation of the sales contract” should be stated in the purport of the claim as well as in

However, as alleged by the Plaintiff, ordering the cancellation of a sales contract in the text may be the case of “an action for formation that leads to the effect of forming a certain right or legal relationship by a judgment rendered through a lawsuit.” Such an action for formation is recognized only where there is a express provision in the law, and it is not permissible if there is no legal basis.

In addition, as seen earlier, the sales contract concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the instant real estate is not revoked only by the validity of the instant judgment, but is already revoked by the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent of revocation.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim seeking to order the cancellation of a sales contract is unlawful because it constitutes a case without legal basis.