1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of

2. The third written statement in the first written judgment of the court of first instance in the part to be used was "each was partitioned" and "each was divided".

“G” in the last place of the same Dong shall be 620 square meters “G” in E Miscellaneous land.

The fifth to seventh shall be followed by the following:

A. (1) As to the assertion of coercion or unfair legal act, the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant constructed a building on the instant land owned by the Defendant after the failure to implement the first agreement of this case, and the Plaintiff, without any interest, continued to file a civil petition with the Seo-gu Office of Gwangju, and failed to undergo a completion inspection from the Seo-gu Office of Gwangju, the Plaintiff forced the Defendant to sign the second agreement of this case on the condition that the Plaintiff would sell consolation money amounting to KRW 20 million and the instant land at KRW 1 million per square year, and forced the Defendant to sell it to the Defendant on the condition that he withdraws a civil petition, and eventually, the Defendant

Therefore, the second agreement of this case is either made by coercion or by unfair legal act as stipulated in Article 104 of the Civil Act.

(2) According to the evidence revealed earlier and the results of the fact-finding conducted by the first instance court on the Seo-gu Office of Gwangju on June 19, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a civil petition with respect to a building under construction in the land owned by the Defendant, and the Plaintiff promised to withdraw the said civil petition at the time the second agreement ( July 10, 2017) was made with the Defendant at the time of the second agreement on July 11, 2017, and it can be recognized that the said civil petition was withdrawn on July 11, 2017. However, in view of the foregoing facts as stated in the evidence No. 4 and the testimony of the witness of the first instance court L, the Defendant agreed to the second agreement of this case by the Plaintiff’s coercion.

No. 2 of this case