1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3.Paragraph 1 of the text of the judgment of the court of first instance.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 21, 2006, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant’s accommodation C to purchase 1/2 shares of KRW 2664 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) prior to D in Jeju-si owned by the Defendant at KRW 9 million (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

B. The Plaintiff paid to C the purchase price of KRW 1 million on August 21, 2006, and KRW 9 million on September 18, 2006, including the remainder of KRW 8 million on September 18, 2006, but did not receive the registration of ownership transfer on the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 8 and 9 (including numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), the whole purport of the pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant’s conclusion of the instant sales contract is the Defendant’s sub-agent, and that the instant sales contract was cancelled by refusing to transfer the ownership of the instant land, even if the Defendant received all the purchase price via C, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to return KRW 9 million to the Plaintiff with its restitution to its original state.

In regard to this, the Defendant merely conferred the right of representation to Eastern E with regard to the sale and purchase of the instant land, and did not grant the right of representation to C, and did not receive KRW 9 million through C, thus asserting that the Plaintiff does not have the obligation to return the purchase price of KRW 9 million to the Plaintiff.

B. In full view of the following facts or circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted prior to the judgment 1, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3, Eul evidence Nos. 3, and Eul evidence Nos. 3, and testimony of the witness witness F of the party trial, it is reasonable to deem that Eul is the defendant's sub-agent granted the power of representation again from Eul, for which the power of representation was granted for the sale and purchase of the land of this case by the defendant Eul. Thus, the effect of the sales contract of

1. The defendant living in the United States shall delegate the sale of the land of this case to Dong E living in Busan, and shall be entrusted to E.