1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment in this part of the basic facts is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it shall be quoted by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The parties’ assertion that the Plaintiff merely received the amount equivalent to KRW 125,200,00 (=a down payment = KRW 75,200,000 x 20%) as stated in a real estate sales contract (Evidence 5) prepared with B on December 29, 2004, as the purchase price was KRW 125,20,000 (=a down payment + KRW 376,00,000 x 20%).

On the other hand, the defendant and Eul asserted that the above contract was merely a multi-unit contract and there was a separate real transaction contract, and Eul paid to the plaintiff the sum of KRW 120 million as premium on December 30, 2004, KRW 30 million on January 13, 2005, KRW 120 million on January 13, 2005, and that the plaintiff paid the contract deposit and the seven part payments paid to the plaintiff, KRW 75,200,000 on the sum of the contract deposit and the seven part payments paid by the plaintiff, and KRW 75,20,000 on the test expenses.

B. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the statements in the evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the testimony of the witness B of the first instance trial, the testimony of the witness E of the party trial, and the overall purport of the arguments, the Plaintiff may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff received KRW 120 million in total with the premium, in addition to the Plaintiff’s payment of the down payment and the 7th intermediate payment paid by the Plaintiff, and incidental expenses, such as the interior cost, etc., other than the Plaintiff’s payment of the down payment and the 7th intermediate payment, the Plaintiff’s payment of KRW 75,200,000,000 as the premium, etc., and the amount of KRW 10,000,000 won on January 13, 2005. Accordingly, the instant disposition based on this premise is lawful.

① In the process of submitting explanatory materials related to the gains on transfer of the above apartment, B submitted a written confirmation of transaction that the premium is KRW 120 million, and at the court of first instance, B testified that the above sales contract was a multiple contract, and actually entered into a contract with the premium of KRW 120 million or more, and E testified that corresponds to B’s statement.