1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

On October 21, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) purchased a parcel of 848 square meters and 143 square meters prior to C, Jung-gu, Incheon, Jung-gu, Incheon, which is owned by the Defendant, from the Defendant, in the purchase price of KRW 600 million; (b) paid the down payment of KRW 30 million on the date of the contract; and (c) paid the remainder of KRW 570 million until December 10, 2013; and (d) agreed that the contract deposit shall be deemed as the basis for compensation for damages, by allowing the Defendant to file a claim for damages arising from

The Plaintiff paid the Defendant the down payment of KRW 30 million on the date of the contract pursuant to the above agreement, but did not pay the remainder KRW 570 million until December 10, 2013.

Around December 17, 2013, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the remainder amount of KRW 570 million would be paid to the Plaintiff by December 23, 2013, and that the said payment would be revoked without any separate notice if it exceeds the said payment period.

However, the defendant could not pay the balance by the above deadline.

[Grounds for recognition] The Plaintiff agreed to prepare so-called a so-called “contest in which the actual purchase price is KRW 600 million or in form, KRW 330 million at the time of the Plaintiff’s purchase and sale contract for the purport of the whole pleading, including the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence, Eul evidence No. 1, and

However, in the event that there is a difference between the report and the actual transaction as a result of the confirmation by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff requested the Plaintiff to prepare a written contract with the purchase price of KRW 600 million, but the Defendant rejected it without justifiable grounds.

Since the contract of this case was cancelled due to these defendant's responsibility, the defendant should return the down payment amount of KRW 30 million to the plaintiff.

There is no evidence to prove the plaintiff's assertion concerning the reasons for cancellation of the contract.

Rather, according to the statement Nos. 1 and 2, it is only recognized that the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the payment of the remainder, and that the agreement was not in violation of the law, and that the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the payment of the remainder.

Therefore, the contract asserted by the plaintiff.