1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 12, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with Defendant C with the total purchase price of KRW 166,6 million (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) on the Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Apartment Complex 105 Dong 101 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) (hereinafter “instant apartment”). Of the above amount, the Plaintiff paid the first down payment of KRW 5 million on January 12, 2015, and the second down payment of KRW 3 million on February 15, 2015, respectively, and paid the remainder of KRW 158 million on March 9, 2015.

B. According to the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff paid KRW 5 million to Defendant C on January 12, 2015, and KRW 3 million on February 15, 2015, pursuant to the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff issued to Defendant C a certificate of content that the instant sales contract will be cancelled on March 24, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Defendant B, a person in charge of the sale of the instant apartment, asserted by the Plaintiff, stated that “A loan of KRW 126 million out of the sale price of the instant apartment may be obtained from the first financial right with low interest,” and concluded the sales contract with Defendant C with the Plaintiff.

However, after the conclusion of the instant sales contract, Defendant B, after its reversal, obtained a loan of KRW 16 million from the first financial right to the Plaintiff and lost the Plaintiff’s trust by providing that the remainder may receive a loan from the second financial right with low interest, and the Plaintiff cancelled the instant sales contract.

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to return the down payment of eight million won paid by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff.

B. According to the evidence Nos. 1 and 10 of Gap, it is recognized that at the time of consultation on the sales contract of this case by defendant B, the plaintiff could pay 126 million won out of the sales price of the apartment of this case to the plaintiff at the time of consultation on the sales contract of this case.