1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as follows, except for the additional determination as to the assertion emphasized or added by the Plaintiff and the Defendants in this court, and therefore, it is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420

In light of the custom of the real estate transaction involving the acquisition of the obligation to return the lease deposit, the sales proceeds of the instant commercial building and the amount of the deposit for lease, etc., the Plaintiff asserts that, at least after the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the lease contract will continue for a considerable period of time after the conclusion of the instant sales contract, it was included in the contents of the instant sales contract, or was based on the sales contract. However, the instant sales contract was notified that the instant lease contract will be terminated because it did not go through the conclusion of the instant sales contract, and thus, the instant sales

However, the circumstances alleged by the Plaintiff alone were included in the terms of the instant sales contract that the instant lease contract will continue for a considerable period after the conclusion of the sales contract.

It is difficult to recognize that such circumstance is the basis of a sales contract, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that such a practice exists under the general transaction practices, so the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

(1) The Plaintiff’s grounds for appeal do not differ significantly from the allegations in the first instance trial, and even if the allegations and evidence are re-examineed, the fact-finding and judgment in the first instance judgment are justifiable). The Defendants’ assertion as to the Defendants should have expressed their intent to waive and cancel the down payment in order to recognize that the instant sales contract was rescinded upon the exercise of the right to rescission stipulated in Article 5 of the contract. The Plaintiff has several times.