1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is that the court of first instance, which cited the judgment of the court of first instance, dismissed the "beneficiary of first instance" as the "beneficiary of first instance," and except for the part where the plaintiff added the judgment as follows, it is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

【Supplementary Part of Judgment】

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the secondary sales contract was concluded in the status that the primary sales contract was not rescinded as the instant real estate, and that the secondary sales contract was concluded, and that the amount of KRW 4.165 million for the purchase price of the secondary sales contract was determined by deducting KRW 4.65 million for the purchase price of KRW 4.65 million for the primary sales contract, which was already paid by the Defendant to the Nonparty Company, from KRW 4.65 million for the purchase price of the primary sales contract. The seller of the primary sales contract and the secondary sales contract and KRW 20 million for the secondary sales contract are the same parties as the trustee and the truster under the security trust contract.

Considering the above circumstances, the second sale contract was concluded in the purport of extending the validity of the first sale contract, and the first sale contract was implemented as the registration of ownership transfer for the real estate of this case was completed in the name of the defendant, etc. in accordance with the second sale contract. Thus, the second sale contract of this case, which was made in order to secure the return of the down payment amounting to KRW 465 million due to the nonperformance of the first sale contract, was extinguished, and compulsory execution based thereon is not allowed.

B. Determination 1) It is not sufficient to acknowledge that the secondary sales contract was concluded to extend the validity of the primary sales contract by only the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 12 through 19 and some testimonys of O of the witnesses of the party trial. Rather, there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the secondary sales contract was concluded. Rather, evidence Nos. 6, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 6, 7 (tentative number) are available.