1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,000,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 6% from May 5, 2018 to December 13, 2019.

1. On May 4, 2018, the Defendant entered into a contract (i.e., the instant sales contract) with the Plaintiff to purchase the 257.60 square meters of Kimpo-si Dro site (hereinafter “instant land”) and the 1,2-class neighborhood living facilities (E buildings) on its ground (hereinafter “instant building”) and 575.04 square meters of land (hereinafter “instant building”).

The sales contract of this case set the purchase price of KRW 3.3 billion, and the special agreement provides that "In the event that a loan is impossible due to a land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay which is not yet registered at the present land or it is impossible to succeed to existing loan, this contract shall be null and void without penalty and the down payment shall be returned."

(2) The Defendant paid the down payment of KRW 330 million to C on the day of the instant sales contract.

However, around June 14, 2018, the Defendant notified C that the instant sales contract becomes null and void according to the instant special agreement, as a security loan on the instant land is impossible.

The Defendant brought a lawsuit against C against the Incheon District Court Branch Decision 2018Ga103036, which claimed the return of the down payment of KRW 330 million,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, but the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on June 12, 2019 on the ground that it is difficult to deem additional security loan on the instant land as impossible, and it is possible to succeed to existing loans, and thus, it cannot be deemed

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 4, 6, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The defendant asserts that the sales contract of this case is null and void pursuant to the special agreement of this case because it is impossible to offer additional security loans on the land of this case. This is due to the reasons attributable to the plaintiff who is the broker, and thus, the plaintiff cannot claim brokerage fees

However, in full view of each description B 1 through 9, since the land of this case on the instant land is unregistered, this is so-called a secured loan, not a fixed collateral loan.