1. As to KRW 144,00,000 among the Plaintiff and KRW 72,00,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 72,00,000 from September 16, 2014.

Facts of recognition

On August 30, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased approximately KRW 3173 square meters and approximately 286 square meters of road shares from the Defendant among the Gyeonggi-gun C and D (hereinafter “instant land”). The Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 72 million on the date of the contract, the intermediate payment of KRW 300 million on September 11, 2014, and the remainder of KRW 350 million on September 30, 2014 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

The Plaintiff paid the down payment by paying KRW 12 million to the account in the name of the Defendant on August 30, 2014, and KRW 70 million on September 1, 2014.

(B) Article 6 of the sales contract of this case provides, “If a seller or a purchaser fails to perform any of the terms and conditions of this contract, the other party may demand in writing the other party to the contract and cancel the contract. The other party may claim damages arising from the cancellation of the contract respectively, and unless otherwise agreed, the contract deposit shall be deemed as the basis for compensation for damages.”

[Ground of recognition] There was no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Gap evidence No. 11-1-3, and the purport of the entire argument by the parties concerned at the time of conclusion of the contract of this case by the plaintiff, which was the object of the right to collateral security, the joint collateral security was established for both parties to collateral security and the maximum debt amount of KRW 1.3 billion.

If the Plaintiff and the Defendant paid an intermediate payment of KRW 300 million to the Defendant, the Defendant agreed to cancel the right to collateral security on the instant land.

However, the defendant, after receiving the down payment from the plaintiff, filed a complaint about the assessment of the share in the road, and rejected the receipt of the intermediate payment and the cancellation of the right to collateral security.

Therefore, the instant sales contract did not comply with the contract that was attributable to the Defendant on September 15, 2014.