1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 40,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from June 2, 2016 to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff delegated the Defendant with the sale of 11,231/52,207 shares (hereinafter “instant real estate”) out of 13,223 square meters of forest land C, Gyeong-dong, Gyeongnam-gun, the Plaintiff himself/herself owned by the Plaintiff.

B. On December 3, 2005, the Defendant sold shares of 50,220/11,231 of the instant real estate to D, and sold shares of 60,000,000 won with the purchase price, and 5220/11,231 of the instant real estate to E on January 10, 206, and sold shares of 60,000 won with the purchase price (the down payment of 15,00,000 won on January 10, 2006, the intermediate payment of 20,000,000 won on November 10, 2006, and the balance of 25,000,000 won on November 13, 2006, and 300,000 won on December 23, 206, respectively, as the purchase price.

C. Since then, the Defendant paid only KRW 100 million out of the total amount of KRW 140 million received as above to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to sell the instant real estate and return the sales price of KRW 40 million not paid to the Plaintiff out of the sales price received.

B. On the other hand, the Defendant paid KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff, one of the remainder of KRW 25 million received from E. As such, the Defendant’s payment of KRW 15 million to the Plaintiff was 25 million out of the down payment and the intermediate payment of KRW 15 million and KRW 25 million (the difference between the E sale price and KRW 15 million in the F sale price). As to the down payment of KRW 15 million, the Defendant filed the instant lawsuit after the lapse of 10 years from January 10, 2006, which was the date on which the Plaintiff received the down payment, and the extinctive prescription was completed after the lapse of 10 million from January 10, 2006, which was the date on which the Plaintiff received the down payment. ② The remainder of KRW 25 million was settled in a separate lawsuit, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with.

1. First of all, the defendant raises a defense that the prescription for the down payment of KRW 15 million has been completed on the premise that he/she sent KRW 30 million as "repaid money".

However, the defendant in this case.