1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Basic facts

A. As of December 29, 2005, a sales contract was prepared to sell KRW 744m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) out of the purchase price of KRW 63,000,000 to E, a corporation (hereinafter “C”) (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) to E, who is his/her father, the Plaintiff’s father, for KRW 744m2 (hereinafter “instant land”).

(A) evidence of heading 2.2

The fact that the actual purchaser of the instant sales contract is not E but the Plaintiff is not a dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

(6) Date of pleading for recognition: [Date of pleading for recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of evidence A1 and 2, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Under the party’s assertion and judgment, we will also examine the Plaintiff’s claim on the principal lawsuit and the Defendant’s counterclaim.

(1) On December 2005, the Defendant, who had been employed as C’s employee of C around the Plaintiff’s assertion (1) and had the Plaintiff enter into the instant sales contract by deceiving the Plaintiff to the effect that the instant land was developed promptly and was expected to make a big profit.

On December 29, 2005, the Plaintiff paid the purchase price of KRW 63 million to C.

(Reasons for Claim) With respect to the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff paid C the sum of KRW 40 million on December 5, 2005, and KRW 45 million on December 29, 2005, and KRW 45 million on December 29, 2005. The Defendant paid KRW 40 million on the pretext that he considered the work for the instant sales contract, and received a refund of KRW 15 million among them.

(The official land price of the instant land is KRW 882,360 (the amount specified in the cause of the claim) around December 20, 2005, and is merely KRW 3,749,760 as of December 28, 2015.

In addition, the land introduced in C is not the land of this case as the original city H land.

As such, the Plaintiff suffered damages of KRW 63 million due to joint tort by deception by the Defendant, etc.

① The primary Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 20 million on April 2015, and on May 31, 2015.