1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is an executor who newly constructed E on the ground of Sejong Special Self-Governing City D, and the Plaintiff is a person who purchased the first floor F of the above building (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) through Defendant C, who entered into a sales agency contract with the Defendant Company, as follows:

B. On August 8, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract: (a) paid each of the Defendant Company KRW 31 million; (b) KRW 45 million on August 21, 2017; and (c) KRW 83 million on December 29, 2017; and (b) concluded a sales contract with the Defendant Company to purchase the instant commercial building from the Defendant Company (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). On December 29, 2017, KRW 79,2750,00 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

C. On April 20, 2018, after the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff paid an additional amount of KRW 150 million to the Defendant Company as an intermediate payment.

As the Plaintiff did not pay the balance of the commercial building of this case, the Defendant Company urged the Plaintiff to pay the balance by content-certified mail three times, and notified the Plaintiff that the sales contract of this case was cancelled at the time of the unpaid balance.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap 1, 3-6, 9 evidence, Eul 2 and 5 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Defendant C, who is an employee of the Defendant Company or under the direction and supervision, proposed the purchase of the instant commercial building to the Plaintiff, and promised to guarantee profits by resale before the completion of the instant commercial building.

The Plaintiff entered into the instant sales contract with the Defendant Company by deceiving Defendant C.

Even if not, the Plaintiff entered into the instant sales contract due to the mistake that the instant commercial building could be resold before the completion of construction.

This is an important part of the sales contract as a premise for the purchase of the commercial building of this case, and it was indicated as the contents of the sales contract of this case.

Therefore, the plaintiff is on the ground of fraud or mistake.