1. The order to pay the money in the judgment of the court of first instance (Article 1-B of the judgment of the court of first instance) is below.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the instant case is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the part that was used by the court as set forth in the following paragraph (2). Therefore, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article

2. On the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, “3. A. (1)” in the sixth pages of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be made as follows. 1) The Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the down payment of KRW 90 million per contract date, and the intermediate payment of KRW 31 million shall be paid on August 20, 2013, and the remainder of KRW 500 million shall be paid on September 5, 2013. The Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 150 million on September 3, 2013, by subrogation of the Plaintiff’s debt of KRW 150 million on September 16, 2013, and KRW 50 million on October 5, 2013, and KRW 50 million on October 8, 2013 as seen earlier.

Meanwhile, since the Plaintiff was prepared at any time to deliver the instant real estate to the Defendant, within four days from the date of receipt of the preparatory document (i.e., KRW 650 million (i., KRW 90 million - KRW 150 million - KRW 50 million - KRW 50 million - KRW 50 million), among the remaining intermediate payments and the remainder of KRW 900 million - KRW 150 million from the date of receipt of the preparatory document (i.e., the Plaintiff’s delivery of the instant real estate). If the amount is not paid within this period, the fact that the preparatory document dated May 26, 2014 (i.e., the Plaintiff’s cancellation of the instant sales contract) was delivered to the Defendant on the same day, is apparent in the record, and the Defendant does not dispute the Plaintiff’s provision of performance

Although the Defendant was served with the above preparatory documents, the fact that the Plaintiff did not pay KRW 650 million to the Plaintiff does not conflict between the parties. As such, the First Sales Contract of this case was lawfully rescinded on May 31, 2014 after four days from the date on which the preparatory documents were served on May 26, 2014 by the Defendant’s declaration of intent to rescind the said condition of suspension.

The plaintiff is legally released by the service of a duplicate of the complaint of this case.