1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 as well as its related amount from November 2, 2013.

1. The reasoning for the court's explanation on this part is as follows: "The contract deposit was at least KRW 800 million under the above contract, and the contract deposit was at least paid at KRW 300 million among them, and Eul did not pay the contract deposit at any time, and on September 24, 2004, notified EP as to the cancellation of the first contract," the second 16th th th 16th th 12 of the decision of the court of first instance, and the second th 16th th 2th 16th 16th 2th 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 16th 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2004 that "the date of the contract of second 19th 2nd 2nd 2nd 19th 2nd 2nd 4th 2nd 2nd 4th 2nd 2004."

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. At the time of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff paid KRW 8.8 billion to F, who arranged the said initial sales contract, and paid KRW 400 million in total each of the brokerage fees paid by D and C, but all of them reduced the sales amount to KRW 8. billion instead of paying by C. Since then, the Defendant remitted the commission for brokerage to F, who was to bear the Plaintiff’s account from October 4, 2004 to November 10 of the same year.

However, the Defendant entered into the instant sales contract, which reduces the size of the sales contract from 4,00 to 2,000, and paid 200 million won by reducing the brokerage commission. However, the Defendant prepared the instant payment certificate with the agreement to contribute to the conclusion of the said sales contract and to pay the remaining KRW 100 million in addition to the above KRW 100 million already paid, at the same time, to the Plaintiff who had been in the part to settle with F

Even if the Defendant did, the instant case.