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 Plaintiff’s basic facts, upon introduction by A on June 23, 2016, purchased the wooden machinery listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant wooden machinery”) from the Defendant from the Defendant in the amount of KRW 52 million, and agreed to pay the down payment of KRW 10 million to the Defendant on the date of the contract, and the remaining amount of KRW 42 million to be paid by July 23, 2016 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) may be recognized either by dispute between the parties or by the purport of the written evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 1, 2, and 1, and 1, respectively, and all pleadings.

2. Judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion of the cause of claim

A. The plaintiff asserts that since the contract of this case was terminated by agreement, the defendant should return the down payment amount of KRW 10 million paid by the plaintiff to the plaintiff.

A contract termination or termination is a new contract, regardless of whether the contract is rescinded or not, which provides that the parties to the contract shall terminate the validity of the existing contract by mutual agreement and return it to the same state as that in which the contract had not been concluded initially. In order to cancel the agreement, it is required that the agreement would be consistent with the opposite expression of intent, such as the formation of the contract and the acceptance of the contract (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Da77385, Feb. 10, 201). There is no evidence to acknowledge the fact that there is no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant to terminate the validity of the contract of this case.

Rather, according to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 3, 5 through 8, 13 through 19, 26, 27, 3, and 4, the following facts are as follows: ① After the instant sales contract, the plaintiff requested the performance of the instant wooden machine and the return of down payment; ② After the instant sales contract, the defendant refused to sell the instant wooden machine to B on July 8, 2016, and ② thereafter, the defendant concluded a new contract to sell the instant wooden machine to B on July 8, 2016, and the defendant was paid KRW 10 million to the plaintiff.