The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

A. In full view of the adopted evidence, the lower court acknowledged the following facts: (a) on February 18, 2003, the Plaintiff: (b) sold the instant land in KRW 2.75 billion to D (hereinafter “the deceased”) who is the deceased’s decedent on February 18, 2003; and (c) concluded the instant sales contract with the purchase price to be paid by April 1, 2003; (b) completed the registration of the Plaintiff’s claim for ownership transfer on April 3, 2003; and (b) thereafter, on April 3, 2008, the deceased concluded the instant contract with the content that the Plaintiff terminated the registration of the said claim for ownership transfer and is to receive KRW 4.1 billion from B.

Then, the lower court determined that, in light of the following: (a) the deceased was granted a building permit on the instant land immediately after the instant sales contract; (b) the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the instant land as the deceased’s debtor; and (c) the registration of the ownership transfer claim under the name of the deceased was completed; and (d) the contract of this case appears to have been premised on B’s receipt from the deceased of the purchase price of KRW 2.75 million, which was the purchase price under the instant sales contract, around April 1, 2003 by the deceased; and (b) the core content of the instant contract is that B would have acquired the instant land on or around April 1, 2003; (c) the deceased paid KRW 4.1 billion to the deceased and cancelled the registration of the ownership transfer claim under his name; and (d) if B intended to return the instant land to the same state as if the instant sales contract had not been concluded, the contract of this case was reasonable to deem that B had no obvious reason to pay KRW 1.35 billion, which was the initial purchase price.

B. Examining the records in light of the relevant legal principles, such judgment of the court below is just and it is so decided as per the grounds of appeal.