1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. From the first instance court’s scope of adjudication, the Plaintiff filed a claim for restitution following the rescission of the contract as of October 18, 2017 as the principal lawsuit and the claim for damages due to nonperformance, and the Defendant filed a claim for damages due to nonperformance of the contract as a counterclaim.

The court of first instance partly accepted the plaintiff's claim for restitution among the plaintiff's claim for main lawsuit, and dismissed the plaintiff's remaining claims for main lawsuit and the defendant's counterclaim.

The judgment of this court is limited to the part cited in the principal lawsuit and the part of the counterclaim claim, and the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the above part of the defendant's objection (the main lawsuit, the restoration claim and the counterclaim claim). 2. The reasoning of this part of the basic fact is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the modification as follows, since it is identical to the "1. Basic fact" in the judgment of the court of first instance, it is acceptable

5 pages of the judgment of the first instance.

subsection (1) shall be amended as follows:

“E. On April 23, 2018, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a letter verifying the content that “the Plaintiff is in a state in which the Plaintiff has been prepared to pay the balance.” The Plaintiff supplied the copies of the approval of the form of gold and the form of gold, and supplied the copies of the approval of the form of gold and the form of gold within seven days after the receipt of the content certification. The Plaintiff sent a letter verifying the content to the Defendant on April 25, 2018, stating that “if the form of gold and the form of gold are not supplied within seven days after the receipt of the content certification, it shall be notified that the said period will expire and the contract will be terminated at the same time.” On April 30, 2018, the Plaintiff sent a letter verifying the content that the contract was terminated on the grounds of the Defendant’s nonperformance of obligation, and that the said notice was sent to the Defendant around that time.”

3. Determination as to the claim for restitution among the principal lawsuit

A. A. A summary of the parties’ assertion 1 Plaintiff around April 2018, the Plaintiff agreed to pay the Defendant a balance of KRW 9,500,000 and an additional payment of KRW 80,000,000 to the Defendant.