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. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 3, 2006, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant on the purchase price of KRW 40 million with respect to the mining right of this case (hereinafter “the mining right of this case”) and the remaining payment date (within six months from the date of obtaining the mining permission (authorization of mining plan) for the mining right of this case) and registered the transfer of the mining right of this case to the Defendant on July 4, 2006.

B. On the other hand, on April 3, 2007, the Defendant obtained from the Gangwon-do Governor of Gangwon-do approval of mining plan (hereinafter “approval of mining plan of this case”) regarding the mining right of this case and other mining rights (registration number B, mining land register C; mining name and area of each mining right of this case are the same as that of each mining right of this case) owned by the Defendant, and paid 4 million won out of the purchase price of this case to the Plaintiff on July 28, 2009.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 36 million unpaid for the sale of this case and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from April 4, 2008 to August 10, 2012, which is the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case from the next day to the day of full payment (one year from the date of authorization of the mining plan of this case) and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. First, the Defendant asserted to the effect that it was impossible to authorize the mining plan of the instant mining right from the beginning, and thus, it cannot comply with the Plaintiff’s claim. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and as seen earlier, the Defendant obtained the authorization of the mining plan of the instant case after the purchase of the mining right.