1. The defendant's High Government District Court Decision 2010Kahap4769 decided on the claim for the return of down payment against the plaintiff.

The plaintiff asserts that since the defendant deposited all obligations pursuant to the judgment of Paragraph (1) of this Article, which was filed by the defendant against the plaintiff as the cause of claim for the return of unjust enrichment following the invalidation or cancellation of a sales contract on land, including CY 6,419 square meters, which was filed by the defendant as the cause of claim against the plaintiff, compulsory execution based on the judgment of Paragraph (1) of this Article against the plaintiff shall not be permitted. Since the defendant did not appear at the due date of pleading even after receiving the notice of due date of pleading, and did not clearly dispute the plaintiff's assertion because he did not submit a reply and other legal brief, it shall

Therefore, it is reasonable to deny compulsory execution based on the judgment of the defendant as stated in Paragraph (1) of the Disposition against the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted, and it is so decided as per Disposition.