1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On July 5, 2005, the Plaintiff between the Defendant’s agent C and D, the representative director of which was the Plaintiff, is the E-B and two parcels, etc. (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

A) The sales contract for the sale of the total purchase price of KRW 530 million (hereinafter “instant contract”) is deemed to be the sales contract.

(2) The Defendant demanded that the Plaintiff deducts KRW 70,00 from the purchase price of the instant contract (in conclusion, demanding that the Plaintiff deducts KRW 70,000 from the purchase price of the instant contract) on the condition that the instant contract was concluded.

3) Around June 2006, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff the full purchase price of the instant real estate. 4) The Defendant purchased the instant real estate in the name of his wife C in the name of his wife, but sold it to F in the unregistered resale price for KRW 600 million.

5) The Defendant purchased KRW 5.3 million from the Plaintiff (the instant real property) in the name of his wife C, including the introduction cost of KRW 7,000,00,000,000 from the Plaintiff, and received KRW 600,000 from F due to unregistered resale, thereby taking advantage of the amount of KRW 7,000,000,000,000,000,000 from F

(2) The statement submitted by the plaintiff is quoted. (2)

Judgment

1) In addition to the case where an investigation is conducted outside the court, documentary evidence is deemed to be the same as the case where the parties are present at the date of pleading or on the date of preparation, and submit it in reality on the date of pleading or on the date of preparation, and the complaint or preparatory brief attached with documentary evidence is stated (see Supreme Court Decision 91Da15775, Nov. 8, 191). Thus, insofar as the Plaintiff did not appear on the date of pleading of this case, there is no evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion. 2) Even if an investigation is conducted on the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, the seller of this case’s real estate is not an individual but a corporation, and the Plaintiff is the representative director.