1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's claim expanded in the trial and the incidental appeal are dismissed, respectively.

2. The appeal costs.

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 the addition or dismissal 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.

2. The following shall be added at the fourth end of the first instance judgment:

The Plaintiff paid KRW 150 million, not KRW 70 million, but KRW 1.45 billion as the down payment, and paid KRW 150 million, not KRW 20 million as the down payment. As such, the Plaintiff also sought payment of KRW 15 million, which is a part of the down payment paid due to restitution to its original state.

According to the evidence evidence Nos. 4 and 5, and Eul evidence Nos. 2, the plaintiff and the defendant stated that on September 9, 201, the plaintiff purchased the real estate of this case from the defendant on September 9, 201, and paid the down payment of KRW 1.50 million on the date of the contract. However, it is acknowledged that the contract was prepared by the plaintiff on the date of the contract. On the other hand, in full view of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 1 and 6, and the court's inquiry into the facts, the whole arguments were acknowledged. In other words, the defendant stated that the purchase price of this case is KRW 70 million on a consistent basis with an investigation agency, and the down payment is KRW 20 million, and the down payment is KRW 800,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won at the time of the contract.