1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The part of the second and third upper parts of the judgment of the court of first instance, "However, the defendant company appealed and argued that the defendant company did not consent to the transfer of the right to sell lots between the plaintiff and the defendant A" (Seoul High Court 2014Na203923) is "However, the defendant company appealed on September 4, 2014 against the above judgment of the court of first instance (this court 2014Gahap54331) and that "the defendant company did not consent to the transfer of the right to sell lots between the plaintiff and A" in the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2014Na203923). The plaintiff withdrawn the above lawsuit on February 10, 2015."

Part 5 of the judgment of the first instance court is deleted, "On the other hand, the lawsuit against the defendant company was withdrawn."

The first instance court's judgment from the fifth to the second half of the upper half of the fifth to the fifth to the fifth.

“4 Also, the Defendant Company may rescind the contract even without the need for provision of performance, inasmuch as Article 2(1)2 of the instant sales contract provides that “A may cancel the contract after the Defendant Company notified the payment of the balance within three months from the date of the contract.” Thus, the Defendant Company may assert that the contract may be rescinded even without the need for provision of performance.

However, it is difficult to interpret the above provision as a waiver of the right of simultaneous performance of the contract for sale in this case. Thus, even if such provision is applicable, it is necessary to provide the defendant company with performance to cancel the contract. As seen earlier, the defendant company appealed against the judgment of this court 2014Gahap5431 on September 4, 2014, and the plaintiff has already been transferred the status of the buyer by the plaintiff.