1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 125,000,000 with interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from June 22, 2016 to the date of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. D entered into a sales contract with the Eunpyeong Construction Corporation on May 22, 2014 and the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul E Apartment 1104 Dong 1404 (the instant apartment) (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

D died on June 1, 2014.

B. Defendant C received documents for resale of the right to sell apartment units from D before D’s death; however, on May 17, 2015, after D’s death, Defendant C entered into a contract to sell the instant apartment units with the Plaintiff for KRW 420,000,000 (the instant sales contract) under the name of D.

At the time, the down payment is KRW 42,000,000, and the intermediate payment is KRW 100,000,000,000 on May 19, 2015, and the remainder amount is KRW 278,00,000 on October 13, 2015.

The contract of this case was signed and sealed by Defendant C’s spouse as a practicing licensed real estate agent.

C. After concluding the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant C the down payment of KRW 49,00,000, the intermediate payment of KRW 100,000,000,000, respectively, and deposited KRW 100,000,000 on May 28, 2015, and KRW 31,231,341 on June 1, 2015, respectively.

However, on July 1, 2015, E.S. cancelled the sales contract concluded with D on the grounds of the unpaid balance, etc., and deposited the sales price paid by D (the part of D).

Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 6, Eul 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment D already died at the time of the instant sales contract, and thus, the instant sales contract concluded in its name is null and void, barring any special circumstance. This is likewise true even if Defendant C was delegated with the authority to resell the right of sale prior to the death of Defendant C.

In addition, the Plaintiff was unable to receive the transfer of the instant apartment due to the cancellation of the sales contract by EP. This is because, after the Defendant C entered into the instant sales contract under the name of D, the obligation to pay the remainder, etc. arising from the sales contract concluded under the name of D was not fulfilled.

In this case.