1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

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

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the addition of the judgment of the plaintiff’s assertion in the court of first instance (the court of first instance omitted the judgment of the plaintiff despite the plaintiff’s assertion as follows). Thus, it is consistent with the reasoning of the court of first instance under the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Even if the instant sales contract was effective, the Defendant breached his duty to arrange for the resale of the remaining machinery and apparatus, excluding the machinery and apparatus desired to purchase the Plaintiff among the machinery and apparatus in the instant case. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s rescission of the instant sales contract on the grounds of the Defendant’s nonperformance of obligation and subsequent restitution of the purchase price of KRW 400,00,000, and damages for delay therefrom are sought. (2) Although the sales contract (Evidence A No. 3) provides that the Plaintiff’s remainder payment and intermediate payment in the event of the Plaintiff’s nonperformance of obligation shall be deemed as penalty for breach of contract, it constitutes a penalty for breach of contract, i.e., liquidated damages

However, it is unreasonable to regard the total sum of KRW 400 million in the instant sales contract, which is only KRW 950 million in the purchase price, and KRW 100 million in the down payment, as a penalty for breach of contract, and thus, should be reduced unfairly.

Even if the above provision is considered as a penalty for breach of contract, it is invalid in excess of public order and good morals.

Therefore, the defendant should return to the plaintiff the money that reduced the sum of the down payment and the intermediate payment of KRW 400 million or the specified amount.

B. At the time of conclusion of the instant sales contract, the Defendant’s agent G is responsible for the Plaintiff with the exception of the Plaintiff’s machines and instruments which the Plaintiff wishes to purchase among the instant machines and instruments and resell them to a third party.