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 as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the court makes a dismissal or add a judgment similar to that of paragraph (2) 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

In the judgment of the first instance, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance is divided into “2,628 square meters” or “2,012 square meters” of the 2nd, 4th, 6, 11, and 15th, respectively.

Part 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance: “C. F. F. F. F. 2012 square meters in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun was divided into each land listed in the separate sheet 1, 2, and 3 following division, change of land category, etc.” (C. F. F. F. F. 2,628 square meters in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, on December 30, 2014, the land listed in the separate sheet 1 (the land category was changed as at the answer, August 24, 2016) and I. 2,01 square meters in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and the land was subdivided into each land listed in the separate sheet 2,01 square meters on October 13, 2017.”

2. The Defendant asserts that: (a) the land for which E is delegated the authority to conclude a sales contract on behalf of the Defendant according to the instant conciliation refers only to the land specified in attached Table 1 as part of the site of the building; (b) the sales contract for the instant land is concluded by an unauthorized person; and (c) the purchase price for each sales contract executed by E on behalf of the Defendant was paid a total of KRW 18940,000,000 or KRW 158,000,000,000,000,000,000 shall be paid from the Plaintiff and the additional purchase price shall be settled.

According to the statement of evidence No. 9, the defendant presented a proposal of mediation prior to the completion of the conciliation in the Daejeon District Court's 2015Kadan52505 damages (former), and the proposal of mediation is acknowledged as being "616 m2,012 m2 and 28 m2,012 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2.