1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from January 8, 2016 to October 25, 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who engages in a contract manufacturing business, etc. in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City with the trade name of "C", and the Defendant is an owner of 103 square meters among the five-story buildings on the ground of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City D above.

B. On April 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant conducted a trade consultation with regard to the portion of 381.3 square meters of 103 square meters among 103 square meters and 1042 square meters (hereinafter “the instant building portion”).

C. On April 23, 2015, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 20,000 to the Defendant.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 8, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The plaintiff's summary of the plaintiff's assertion is that the part of the building of this case owned by the defendant would be appropriate for the Do gold manufacturing factory while the plaintiff colored the Do gold manufacturing factory, and the purchase consultation with the defendant was conducted on the part of the building.

The Plaintiff paid KRW 20 million to the Defendant as a provisional contract deposit in the course of negotiations on purchase with the Defendant.

However, in order for the plaintiff to operate the factory in the building area of this case, a number of problems such as wastewater treatment plant use problems, adjustment of electric use with other sectional owners of the five-story building D above the building of this case, Nam-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City, have been resolved. The defendant, the seller, refused to resolve the problem, and the plaintiff, therefore, should not operate the factory in the building area of this case smoothly, and the plaintiff refused to conclude this contract with the defendant.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 20,000,000,000 paid in advance to the Plaintiff as well as KRW 20,990,00,00, which is the sum of the cost of removal work that the Plaintiff believed to be effective when the contract is concluded.

B. As to the part of the instant building in April 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s summary of the Defendant asserted that the buyer, the Defendant, the seller, the seller, the sales price of KRW 670,00,000, and the down payment of KRW 20,000,000, and the remainder of KRW 650,000,000, the buyer succeeds to the obligation of collateral security.