1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is the owner of the building in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seoan-gu, Seoul, and paid a performance fee (6%) according to the sales performance while entrusting D with the sales agency business for the C commercial buildings.

5,00,000,000 on January 16, 2016, 27,000 on January 11, 2016: (i) the total amount deposited as of the date of payment on the date of concluding the contract (the down payment) (i.e., the purchase price) (i., the purchase price (the purchase price) (i.e., the purchase price) (i., the purchase price (the purchase price)) (i.e., the total amount deposited (the purchase price) (i., the purchase price (the purchase price) (i.e., the purchase price (the purchase price)) (i., the purchase price (the purchase price (the purchase price)) (i.e., the purchase price (the purchase price (the purchase price)) (i., the purchase price (the purchase price (the purchase price) price (the purchase price (the purchase price) price (the purchase price))); and (ii) the sale price (the purchase price (the purchase price) price (the sale price) price (the sale price) price)) shall be determined.

B. After receiving counseling from D on sale, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant to purchase C commercial E and F (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) as indicated in the following table (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and paid each of the following amounts as down payment to the Defendant in installments:

C. The first installment payment date under the instant sales contract was March 10, 2016, but the Plaintiff did not pay intermediate payments up to that time, and the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the instant sales contract was cancelled on the grounds that the payment of intermediate payments was delayed on May 2, 2016 after demanding the Plaintiff to pay intermediate payments several times.

[Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy, Gap 1-3 evidence (including paper numbers), Eul 4 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination as to the assertion of default liability

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion made an agreement with D at a discount of KRW 25 million from the sales price per commercial building of this case and that D would sell as a substitute contract before the date of the payment of the intermediate payment and have D receive premium of KRW 25 million per commercial building before the date of the payment of the intermediate payment, thereby concluding the instant sales contract.

For the following reasons, the Defendant is contractually responsible for the agreement on the above substitute contract, and the Plaintiff cancelled the instant sales contract by serving the duplicate of the complaint of this case upon the Defendant’s nonperformance of the agreement.

Therefore, the defendant received the payment from the plaintiff.