The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

The grounds of appeal are examined.

For reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s simultaneous performance defense based on beneficial non-performance claims, on the ground that the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”) was obligated to deliver the entire site of this case to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and that the Defendant’s claim for repayment of beneficial non-performance claims asserted by the Plaintiff was extinguished due to set-off against the Plaintiff’s claim for return of unjust enrichment

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, such determination by the court below is just, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on res judicata, return of unjust enrichment

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.