1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and each of the individual parts of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the following, and in addition to the judgment of the defendant's new argument in this court, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning the "decision on the cancellation of termination fee" from 14th to 6th 1st 6th 1st of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the written reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. Parts to be dried;

A. The first instance judgment (hereinafter “the text of the first instance judgment”) Nos. 3-1 and 2-1 and 3-2 of the first instance judgment (hereinafter “the document necessary for the registration of ownership transfer of the instant real estate and the issuance of all documents necessary for the registration of ownership transfer of the instant real estate and the cancellation of the registration of ownership creation of the instant real estate”) are the same.

B. The part of the 3rd to 4th page “Determination as to the 3rd party’s argument of office capacity” is deleted according to the withdrawal of the Defendant’s argument by this court.

C. The above B.

Pursuant to the deletion of subsection 4, the fourth 4 pages of the “Determination as to the argument for revocation of a declaration of intent by a third party’s fraud” shall be made by the “Determination as to the argument for revocation of a declaration of intent by a third party’s fraud”.

3. The modified part

B. Judgment 1 on the Defendant’s assertion on the cancellation of the termination fee 1) The Defendant, claiming 1, has the right to refund the amount of the down payment to the Plaintiff before the Plaintiff pays the remainder and rescind the instant sales contract.

On May 15, 2017, the remaining payment date, the Defendant expressed the intent to cancel the above sales contract to the Plaintiffs several times through the Yong-Nam F, the Republic of Korea, and the instant sales contract was lawfully rescinded, since the Plaintiffs refused to cancel the sales contract and to receive the down payment, and thus, the Defendant’s obligation to pay the down payment was impossible.

B.