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 for the acceptance of the judgment is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the Plaintiff’s supplementary or supplementary determination as to the part concerning which the Plaintiff contests as the grounds for appeal, etc. as the grounds for appeal, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of

2. Additional and supplementary judgments

A. The Plaintiff’s ground of appeal asserts to the following purport.

For the following reasons, the third sales contract (Evidence A1) with the content that the Plaintiff sells the instant building to the Defendant at KRW 123,728,640 (i.e., value-added tax equivalent to 10% of the building price of KRW 62,713,60,00,00 in the building price of KRW 1,237,286,40) is the final sales contract concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

In other words, on June 21, 2014, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that on the condition that the Defendant attracts the hospital to the F building on June 21, 2014, the F building G was discounted by KRW 60 million per square year on the condition that the Defendant actually sold the F building G, on the condition that the Defendant actually sold the hospital.

The primary sales contract was concluded with the defendant, which sells in lots the price of KRW 900 million (excluding value-added tax).

On May 1, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a secondary sales contract (Evidence A 10) that increased the sales amount to KRW 1,082,728,640 (i.e., value-added tax equivalent to 10% of the building price of KRW 927,286,60 in the building price of KRW 62,713,60 in the building price) by changing the subject matter of sale to the instant building and reflecting the increase in the size thereof.

The second sales contract entered the defendant's duty to attract hospital into a special contract as it is.

However, in the first and second sales contracts, the phrase “A” refers to the Plaintiff’s term “A” as the special terms and conditions in this building project site, namely, “A” refers to “B” in the context thereof, and is merely a simple clerical error written erroneously as “A”.

Therefore, regardless of its wording.