1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) pays KRW 213,00,000 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) B.

2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B is the owner of the building with 136 square meters and its ground (hereinafter “instant real estate”). Defendant C is a licensed real estate agent who runs the authorized brokerage business under the trade name of “E Licensed Real Estate Agent Office”, and F is a brokerage assistant working at the above E Licensed Real Estate Agent Office.

B. On March 3, 2017, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract with Defendant B to purchase the instant real estate at KRW 253 million, and the intermediate payment of KRW 20 million is paid on the same day, and the intermediate payment of KRW 20 million is paid when the Plaintiff’s house is sold and purchased or the lease contract is concluded, and the remainder is to be paid on August 11, 2017 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

On May 10, 2017, the Plaintiff paid to Defendant B the same day down payment of KRW 20 million, the intermediate payment of KRW 20 million, respectively.

C. The instant real estate is located within the G Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project (hereinafter “instant project”), and the instant project was authorized to implement the project on November 23, 2006, and was implemented from February 1, 2017 to March 3, 2017. The period for application for parcelling-out was extended from March 4, 2017 to March 13, 2017, and the said extension was announced at H press on March 3, 2017.

Defendant B was eligible for application for parcelling-out as a member of the project of this case, but became eligible for cash settlement because it did not apply for parcelling-out within the above period of application for parcelling-out.

After November 13, 2017, the head of the Busan Southern District Office approved the management and disposition plan on the instant project.

On June 22, 2017, the Plaintiff sent to Defendant B a certificate of content that the instant sales contract was revoked on the ground that the purpose of the instant sales contract could not be achieved due to the progress of the instant business, and the said certificate reached Defendant B around that time.

[Ground of recognition] There is no dispute.