1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant) Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) KRW 201,818, and KRW 134,539 and each of the above costs against Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) A.

1. Determination on the main claim

A. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the evidence evidence Nos. 1 through 4, it is recognized that Plaintiff A owned 3/5 shares in the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Apartment E (hereinafter “instant apartment”) and Plaintiff B owned 2/5 shares, and the Plaintiffs entered into a sales contract with the Defendant on June 4, 2014 by determining the purchase price of the instant apartment owned by the Plaintiffs as KRW 765,000,000, and received KRW 764,663,653 won in total as the purchase price until August 25, 2014, including receiving KRW 70,000 from the Defendant for the same day the down payment, and the Defendant received KRW 764,63,653 in the name of the Defendant on August 25, 2014.

B. According to the above findings of determination, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff A 201,818 won among unpaid purchase price of KRW 336,347, and KRW 134,539, and each of the said payments at the rate of 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26553, Sep. 25, 2015) from October 30 to September 30, 2015, which is the day following the day following the delivery date of the original copy of the instant payment order, to the Plaintiff B, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26553, Sep. 25, 2015).

2. Judgment on the counterclaim

A. Although the plaintiffs should deliver the apartment of this case according to the present condition, the plaintiffs must replace the existing 4 electric lights with the electric lights that could not be used after being worn out, and the two existing 2 electric lights were removed from the existing 2nd, thereby failing to perform contractual obligations, the plaintiffs shall pay 200,000,000 won for the former 4 replacement costs as compensation for damages, and 70,000,000 won for the former 4 replacement costs as well as 70,000,000 won. In addition, even though the plaintiff A was a broker, the plaintiff A committed a tort of mediating its own goods, and the defendant