1. The plaintiff's appeal and each of the plaintiff's claims added by this court are all dismissed.

2. After filing an appeal;

1. The progress of the instant lawsuit, the relationship between the respective claims, and the order of adjudication in this Court

A. At the first instance court, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the cancellation fee under Article 565 of the Civil Act, and the agreed amount based on the Defendant’s letter of undertaking (No. 2, hereinafter “instant letter of undertaking”).

In this court, the Plaintiff added the claim for the down payment under Article 5 of the sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on November 28, 2015, and adjusted the claim for the down payment among the above claims in the first instance trial, respectively, to the third claim.

On the other hand, the plaintiff added the claim for damages under Article 2 of the special terms and conditions of the sales contract of this case to the fourth claim.

B. The relationship between the respective claims and the order of trial in this Court 1) Whether the form of consolidation is either selective consolidation or preliminary consolidation shall be determined on the basis of the nature of the respective claims rather than the intent of the parties. The scope of trial in the appellate court shall be determined on the basis of the nature of the respective claims, including the claims added by this court (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da96868, May 29, 2014). (ii) The Plaintiff only set the order of trial for each of the instant claims, including the claims added by this court, and did not explicitly arrange whether each claim is a simple consolidation or a primary and preliminary consolidation.

Each claim sought by the plaintiff, namely, a claim for down payment under Article 5 of the sales contract of this case, a claim for cancellation under Article 565 of the Civil Act, a claim for contract deposit under the letter of promise of this case, and a claim for damages due to non-performance of obligation are logically incompatible, and thus, are simple

Meanwhile, both the first and third claims, namely, a down payment claim, cancellation fee claim and contract deposit claim, the principal claim amounting to 120,000,000. On the other hand, the claim for damages due to the non-performance of the fourth claims is the principal claim amounting to 96.