1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 28, 2016, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with the Defendant to purchase KRW 155,000,000,000 for the purchase price of KRW 155,000,000 for the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan Government Land Category C (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and KRW 50,000 for the remainder of KRW 105,000 for the purchase price (the date of the contract on the day), and the remainder of KRW 105,00 for the purchase price (the payment date on July 30, 2016).

B. On June 28, 2016, the day of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff paid the down payment of KRW 50,000,000 to the Defendant.

C. The Defendant: (a) from September 2016 to September 1, 2016, via a private individual D in fact, on the instant real estate.

D. A total of KRW 2,350,000 was paid by October.

The instant real estate was approved for the use of the building on October 6, 2016, and the registration of ownership preservation was completed on October 20, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the approval for use of the instant real estate should not be obtained while preparing for moving into the instant real estate, and that registration of preservation of ownership was known, and that the cancellation of the sales contract was demanded to the Defendant. The Defendant promised to return the down payment at the time of the remainder payment.

The defendant returned 2,350,000 won to the plaintiff via D, which is a part of the down payment.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay 63,150,000 won (=50,000,000 won + 15,500,000 won + 63,150,000 won + 15,000,000 won + 15,50,000 won-2,350,000 won) and damages for delay, which are part of the down payment returned to the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff claimed only the amount equivalent to 10% of the total purchase price).

B. The purport of the Defendant’s assertion is without fault, and the Plaintiff is merely a declaration of intent to cancel the contract in advance due to the fact that the Plaintiff is unable to perform the remainder.

3. Determination

(a) The obligations of both parties in a bilateral contract are simultaneously in performance relationship;