1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On March 23, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant, setting the sales amount of KRW 1.7 billion with respect to each of the instant parcels of land (hereinafter “each of the instant parcels of land”) outside 5,223 square meters, which was owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

B. Around the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant determined that KRW 1.2 billion out of KRW 1.7 billion was the Defendant’s acceptance of the Plaintiff’s obligation of loans secured by each of the instant land, in lieu of payment, and that the remainder of KRW 500 million was paid up to March 31, 2019.

C. The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 21, 2009 with respect to each of the instant lands on March 23, 2009.

[Reasons for Recognition: Unsatisfy Facts, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 3 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the remainder of KRW 100 million, excluding the amount of KRW 400 million, the plaintiff was paid out of the remainder 500 million according to the contract of this case, unless there are special circumstances.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant alleged that the Plaintiff paid the full amount of the purchase price stipulated in the instant sales contract, but it is not sufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s each of the documents Nos. 1 and 2, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is rejected.

B. The summary of the first party’s assertion on the completion of extinctive prescription is that the conclusion of the instant sales contract constitutes a commercial activity, and thus, the extinctive prescription of the Plaintiff’s claim for remainder of the purchase price is five years. Since five years have elapsed from March 31, 2009, the said claim for remainder of the purchase price became extinct due to the completion of prescription, and the Plaintiff’s conclusion of the instant sales contract constitutes a commercial activity.