1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked, and

1. This part of the judgment on the cause of a claim is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the assertion by the Defendant and the Intervenor joining the Defendant

A. The summary of the assertion 1) at the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 65 million to the existing lessee of the instant real estate, excluding KRW 5 million, at the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract. (A) There is no dispute between the parties to the instant sales contract, and the fact that the deposit for lease to the existing lessee of the instant real estate was five million won. According to Gap 2, it is recognized that the instant sales contract stated the remainder of five million won limited to the deposit for lease deposit in lump sum payment. (b) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of each of the instant cases, the Defendant agreed to pay only KRW 65 million between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff at the time of entering into the instant sales contract, excluding KRW 70 million,000,000,000,0000,0000,000 for the previous lease deposit, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion pointing this out has merit.

As long as the establishment of a disposal document is recognized as authentic, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposal document, unless there is any clear and acceptable reflective evidence that denies the contents of the statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da6753, Jun. 11, 2002). Such a legal principle is likewise applicable to a special agreement entered in the instant sales contract, which is a disposal document, as well as a special agreement entered in the instant sales contract. Therefore, it is difficult to reject the contents of the said special agreement, unless there is any clear and acceptable reflective evidence

The plaintiff stated that he did not participate in the process of preparing the sales contract of this case, but H added.