The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. The contents to be entered in this part of the basic facts are the same as the “1. Basic Facts” on the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. However, the part which is “the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport”

2. The assertion of the right to rescind the court and the determination thereof

A. The gist of the assertion was that the Plaintiff intended to purchase the instant land for the purpose of using it as the gas station and the maintenance plant, and the location of the vehicle access route, which could have an absolute influence on its profitability, was a very important factor in concluding the instant sales contract. As to this, prior to the conclusion of the said sales contract, the Plaintiff believed that prior to the conclusion of the said sales contract, the Plaintiff would be able to give a definite answer to the Defendant’s employees to allow the Defendant’s employees to open the instant land adjacent to the instant land (hereinafter “road”) along with the Plaintiff’s inquiry about the location of the vehicle access route to the instant land (hereinafter “road prior to the conclusion of the said sales contract, and that there was a receipt of drawings (Evidence 6) containing such a content, and thus, the Plaintiff also signed

In light of the developments leading up to the conclusion of the above sales contract, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant entered into a special agreement to set up the entry road of this case, or that the above sales contract includes the Defendant’s obligation to set up the entry road of this case.

Nevertheless, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s demand for the establishment of the entry into the instant land, and then arbitrarily rescinded the said sales contract and disposed of the instant land to the third party.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s rescission of the above sales contract on the grounds of the Defendant’s nonperformance. As such, the Defendant is obligated to return to the Plaintiff the down payment of KRW 870,000,000 received from the Plaintiff pursuant to the above sales contract as its restitution.

(b) judgment 1 kives and the testimony of witness E of the first instance trial as a whole;