1. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On September 15, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract with the Defendant for KRW 69,750,000 for shares of 1537 percent (hereinafter “the instant real estate share”) of the 6679,750,000 among the total amount of D forest land in leisure time, and agreed to receive KRW 10,000 for the intermediate payment, KRW 20,000 on the date of the contract, and KRW 20,000 for the intermediate payment, KRW 39,750,000 on October 30, 2015, respectively.

(hereinafter, this case’s sales contract). B

On October 27, 2015, the Plaintiff, at the request of Nonparty E, prepared a sales contract with the content that the instant real estate was sold to Nonparty E in the purchase price of KRW 111,60,000 (the purchase price of KRW 69,000,000,000, the remainder of KRW 42,600,000,000, in a contract, was sold to each payment condition in October 27, 2015) (hereinafter “the sales contract of this case”), entered a real estate purchaser in E, and issued one copy of the certificate of personal seal impression “D diversion” and one copy of the certificate of personal seal impression “for the verification of transfer of F interest,” and delivered it to Nonparty with each other.

C. On September 15, 2015, the Plaintiff received KRW 10,000,000 as down payment and KRW 59,000,000 in total as part payment and remainder payment on October 27, 2015 on the date of concluding the instant sales contract, and Nonparty E received the registration of transfer of shares on the instant real estate for reasons of sale as of October 30, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Class A, Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s primary assertion and determination are primarily entitled to receive the purchase price under the instant two sales contract from the Plaintiff and E in accordance with the instant two sales contract. Since the Defendant received the purchase price under the instant two sales contract from E and rejected the return of the Plaintiff for the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff suffered property loss due to Defendant’s embezzlement, and thus, the Defendant suffered property loss due to the Defendant’s tort. Accordingly, the Plaintiff was compensated for property damage.