1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant shall be KRW 150,000,000 and KRW 50,000 among them.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for cases where the period from April 11 to 19 are as follows. Thus, the defendant is obligated to return the down payment, intermediate payment, KRW 150,00,00 paid to the plaintiff if the contract of this case was lawfully rescinded, and interest thereon. This is alleged to have a concurrent performance relationship with the defendant's duty to return shares. Thus, both parties due to the cancellation of contract are in a concurrent performance relationship (Article 549 of the Civil Act). Article 548 (2) of the Civil Act provides that interest shall be added from the date of receipt to the money which is returned through the performance of duty to return upon rescission of contract. Thus, the defendant is obligated to return the down payment, KRW 150,000,00 paid to the plaintiff, and the above interest shall not be paid in addition to the above duty to return unjust enrichment within the scope of duty to return the above interest.

In this regard, the plaintiff asserts that since the defendant raised a defense of simultaneous performance with regard to the interest accrued to the appellate court, the above defense should be dismissed as a means of attack and defense against the actual time limit.

The method of attack and defense by real time pursuant to Article 149 of the Civil Procedure Act means the method of attack and defense, which may delay the conclusion of litigation by either party by making an adequate time in accordance with the progress of litigation at the latest, on purpose or by gross negligence.