1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 85,00,000 as well as 20% per annum from August 28, 2015 to the date of full payment.

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff purchased 165.3 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) out of 905 square meters in Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, through Defendant B, who is an employee of Defendant Saman Unemployment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Yananan unemployment”), from the Defendants, for KRW 85 million, and paid the purchase price. However, the Defendants are not owners of the instant land, but also owners of the instant land, and thus, the said sales contract is terminated and the Defendants are entitled to return the purchase price.

2. Determination

A. First, according to the evidence evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 as to the claim against Defendant B, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with Defendant B on January 2, 2007 by setting the purchase price of KRW 85 million and paid KRW 85 million to the above Defendant. According to the above facts acknowledged, the above land owner was a land trust company in Korea. According to the above facts, Defendant B sold the instant land which is not owned by itself and did not complete the registration of transfer of ownership. Accordingly, Defendant B is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the purchase price of KRW 85 million and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum as provided by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from August 28, 2015 to the date following the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case sought by the Plaintiff.

B. Next, it is not sufficient to recognize that Defendant B entered into the above sales contract with the Plaintiff as the agent of Defendant Saman Unemployment, solely on the basis of the Plaintiff’s evidence Nos. 1 and 4 as to the claim for Defendant Saman Unemployment, and there is no other evidence to recognize that Defendant Saman Unemployment is a party to the above sales contract. Thus, the claim against the above Defendant on the premise that Defendant Saman Unemployment is a seller of the above sales contract cannot be accepted.

3...