1. The plaintiff's primary claim against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B shall be KRW 50,000,000.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 11, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B with a total of KRW 1,384,000,000,000 for five parcels of land (hereinafter referred to as “instant first sales contract”) and five parcels of land, other than 661 square meters in the wife population D from Defendant B, Young-si (hereinafter referred to as “instant six parcels of land”). The Plaintiff paid KRW 100,000,000 for the down payment to Defendant B.

As of July 11, 2016, the Plaintiff and Defendant B set the payment date of intermediate payment according to the instant sales contract as of September 12, 2016.

B. On March 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant C with an agreement to purchase KRW 120,000,000 square meters of land E with the wife population E from Defendant C (hereinafter “instant second sales contract”) and the down payment of KRW 12,00,000 to Defendant C.

The Plaintiff and Defendant C determined the remaining payment date under the instant sales contract as “within two months after the completion of development activities”.

【Ground of recognition” without any dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 through 6, Gap evidence 2-1 through 6, Gap evidence 3, 4, Gap evidence 13-1 through 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Article 1(3) of the Special Agreement on Land Trade in the First Sale Contract against Defendant B provides that “Where permission for conversion of a mountainous district is not completed by the date of the mid-term payment, an intermediate payment shall be paid within five days from the date the permission is obtained,” the intermediate payment payment payment date has not arrived at the “after permission for conversion of a mountainous district,” and unless permission for conversion of a mountainous district is granted, the intermediate payment payment date has not arrived at the date of the intermediate payment payment payment in relation to Defendant B.

Nevertheless, Defendant B asserted the rescission of the first sale contract of this case on the grounds that the intermediate payment is unpaid even before the deadline for the intermediate payment arrives, which expresses his intention not to implement the contract.