1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 40,000,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from October 1, 2017 to April 12, 2018.

1. On June 19, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant for the purchase price of Category D (hereinafter “instant housing”) among the multi-household housing in Jinjin-si (hereinafter “instant housing”). The Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the instant sales contract to the Plaintiff by September 30, 2017. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff’s completion of the registration of ownership transfer on the instant housing on June 21, 2017, without dispute between the parties. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the instant sales contract and the amount of KRW 40 million from October 1, 2017 to April 12, 2018, with the annual interest rate of KRW 50,000,000,000,0000,000 from the following day to the date of payment, and the damages for delay calculated by the annual interest rate of KRW 15,500,000,000.

2. Defendant’s assertion and judgment

A. The defendant's alleged defect in the housing of this case has a defect that could not achieve the purpose of the sales contract due to water leakage and dissolution, etc., and the defendant did not know the above defect without negligence.

Therefore, the Defendant’s rescission of the instant sales contract pursuant to Articles 580(1) and 575(1) of the Civil Act, and the Defendant is not obliged to pay the remainder of the instant sales contract to the Plaintiff.

B. The image of Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers) is insufficient to acknowledge that there is a defect that could not achieve the purpose of the instant sales contract in the instant housing, and there is no other evidence to prove that there is a defect that could not achieve the purpose of the instant sales contract.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.