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. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) On May 2, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant and the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff owned, No. 402 of the Maman-gu, Ansan-si (hereinafter “instant building”).

(1) The sales contract for the remainder of KRW 160,000,000 is to be sold with the price of KRW 170,000,000, and the down payment of KRW 10,000 is to be paid at the time of the contract, and the remainder of KRW 160,000,000 is to be paid until June 18, 2012 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

(2) On June 28, 2012, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant building to the Defendant.

3) On June 29, 2012, the Defendant prepared a written statement stating that “The remainder amount of KRW 30,000,000 under the instant sales contract shall be paid in three installments from July 2012 to September 30, 2012” to the Plaintiff, and that “The payment shall be made in entirety by September 30, 2012.” 【The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in subparagraphs A and 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings.”

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay the price under the sales contract of this case to the plaintiff, and on the other hand, the plaintiff was paid KRW 153,00,000 from the defendant.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 17,00,000 (=170,000,000 - KRW 153,000,000) due to the instant sales contract and damages for delay.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant’s defense of repayment is a defense that the Defendant repaid the remainder of KRW 10,00,000 according to the instant sales contract, and thus, considering the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement No. 1, the Defendant can be acknowledged to have discharged KRW 10,00,000 out of the remainder of payment pursuant to the instant sales contract to D on August 6, 2012. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for remainder of payment against the Defendant was extinguished within the scope of KRW 10,000,000.

Therefore, the defendant's defense of repayment is justified.

B. The defendant's defense of set-off is the case after the sales contract of this case.