1. According to the counterclaim claim filed at the trial of the first instance, the counterclaim Defendant: (a) KRW 190,000,000 to the counterclaim Plaintiff; and (b) accordingly, KRW 190,000 to the counterclaim.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 20, 2009, the counterclaim Defendant entered into a sales contract with D to purchase the purchase price of KRW 210,000 (5,000,000 on a contract date, an intermediate payment, KRW 50,000,00 on February 28, 2010, and KRW 15,000,00,000 on March 31, 2010 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with D to purchase the remainder of KRW 15,00,00,00 on the purchase price (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and paid KRW 5,00,000 on the day of the contract to D.

B. After February 28, 2010, the counterclaim Defendant paid KRW 15,000,000 out of the intermediate payment of the instant sales contract to D by February 28, 2010.

[Grounds for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1-3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the counterclaim Defendant is obligated to pay to the counterclaim Plaintiff the unpaid purchase price of KRW 190,000,000 (=210,000,000 - down payment of KRW 5,000,000 - the fixed payment of KRW 15,00,000 out of the intermediate payment - the fixed payment of KRW 15,00,000 from the day following the delivery date of the duplicate of the counterclaim of this case to the day of full payment, i.e., 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from December 23, 2015.

(However, since the sales contract of this case seems to have decided not to succeed the right of lease, the Lessee is obligated to transfer its full ownership by removing the burden of the right of lease, etc. on the housing of this case at the same time with the payment of the above sales amount.

As to this, the counterclaim Defendant asserts that the instant sales contract was rescinded by the declaration of intent of the counter-party to cancel the contract on the grounds of the remainder payment of the counter-party Defendant around August 2010.

If a representative who has been granted the power of representation for the conclusion of any contract makes a juristic act authorized to do so, the legal relationship which caused the power of representation, in principle, is terminated by accomplishing the purpose and it is a juristic act.