The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

2. The Defendants shall list each of the 130,000,000 won paid by the Plaintiff at the same time.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance that should be explained as to the basic facts of this case, the allegations by the parties, and whether the sales contract has been lawfully concluded is based on the relevant part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following modifications: “1. Basic Facts,” “2. The allegations by the parties,” and “3. Whether the sales contract of this case has been lawfully concluded,” thereby citing it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

【The part to be repaired 【The real estate of this case” in 3 pages 1 shall be registered as “each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the real estate”).

7 The 6th parallel "B" certificate shall be written with "B/B 1 and 6."

Under the 7th day, the “certificate of personal seal impression issued on the same day” shall be written with “certificate of personal seal impression issued directly by the deceased on the same day.”

2. Whether the sales contract of this case was lawfully rescinded

A. Even if one party’s obligation under the relevant legal doctrine is a prior performance obligation, where the fulfillment period of the other party’s obligation becomes more than that of the prior performance obligation, barring any special circumstance, such as an agreement to perform prior to the intended performance, the both parties, including such obligation, shall be placed in a simultaneous performance relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Da73472, Jun. 13, 2013). Meanwhile, in a bilateral contract in a simultaneous performance relationship, in order to rescind a contract on the grounds that the other party fails to perform his/her obligation, the party who intends to rescind the contract shall provide the other party to perform his/her obligation and have the other party omit the contract without delay. Provided, That where one party provided the other party with the performance of one’s own obligation but the other party expressed in advance his/her intent not to perform his/her obligation, the contract may be rescinded on the grounds of delay in performance of the other party’s obligation.

Supreme Court Decision 201No. 26 delivered on November 26, 1991