1. The defendant on June 19, 2009, as to each of the lands listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 27, 2009, the Plaintiff sold each of the land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”) to the Defendant as of 20,000,000 won, and the payment date on May 12, 2009.

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). B.

On June 19, 2009, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer of the instant land to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1-2, Gap evidence 2-2, Eul evidence 11-1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the claim for cancellation of registration of ownership transfer

A. The Plaintiff asserted that on May 12, 2009, the Plaintiff was remitted KRW 20 million from the Defendant, and returned it immediately at the Defendant’s request. As such, the Plaintiff did not receive the purchase price for the instant land, and exercised the right to rescission on the instant sales contract on the grounds that the purchase price is unpaid thereafter, the Defendant is obligated to cancel the registration of ownership transfer as to the instant land.

As to this, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff paid KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff, but that the Defendant received KRW 20,000,000 from the Plaintiff was paid to the Plaintiff as a road opening facility for the daily land, including the Plaintiff’s Government-Si Land C.

B. The debtor bears the burden of proof as to the fact that the payment of the purchase price of this case was made, and we examine whether the defendant paid KRW 20,000,000 to the purchase price.

According to Gap evidence No. 3 and Gap evidence No. 23, it is recognized that the defendant remitted 20,000,000 won to the plaintiff's agricultural bank account (D) around May 12, 2009, around 16:10:10 on May 12, 2009.

On the other hand, in full view of the statement No. 5 and the response of the submission of financial transaction information to the director of the U.S. branch office of the U.S. government of the U.S. court, the defendant demanded the plaintiff to return the above money at the U.S. branch office of the U.S. government after the above remittance, and accordingly, the defendant demanded the return of the money.