1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The real estate name limit of KRW 100,000 for the purchase price of basic facts [one million for the purchase price of KRW 5,000,000 for the contract amount of KRW 5,000 for the intermediate payment of KRW 5,000 for the intermediate payment of KRW 5,000 for the contract amount (payment on October 27, 2015), the balance of KRW 90,000 for the remainder of KRW 90,000 for the purchase price (payment on November 12, 2015)] Article 3 of the above real estate name shall be dated November 12, 2015

(b) [Matters of special agreement]

1. The sales contract is the expected cost of removal under the urban planning, and the subsequent compensation is a condition for the application of the right to move in at least 33 square meters at the time of compensation, and the compensation shall be paid to the seller.

2.The sale and purchase contract will be replaced with the same condition in the event that the right to take occupancy at the time of compensation does not arise.

3.The sales contract will be the key to the transfer of ownership in any balance.

(4) The sales contract shall be the post-management until occupancy, and the 2,000,000 won shall be separate. 5.0% of the registration cost at the time of registration, shall be paid by the seller.

On October 23, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a real estate sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with regard to the right to move-in in at 33 square meters from the Defendant and Seoul Metropolitan Government (the removal site: Mapo-gu, Seoul; hereinafter “the removal site”).

B. The Plaintiff paid the Defendant the down payment of KRW 5,000,000 on the day of the contract pursuant to the instant sales contract.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 5 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a sales contract for the right to move into the area subject to special supply of the removed residents, and the sale and transfer of the right to move into the area is prohibited by law.

Nevertheless, the defendant, not illegal transactions, led the conclusion of the contract by harshly treating both plaintiffs.

The Plaintiff notified the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Office, etc. of the cancellation of the instant sales contract on the ground that the sales right was illegal.

Therefore, the plaintiff seeks the return of down payment paid by the plaintiff on the following basis.

In this case.