1. The Defendant received KRW 20,000,000 from the Plaintiff at the same time, and simultaneously received the payment from the Plaintiff:

(a) 1,378 square meters prior to Naju-si;

1. Basic facts

A. On April 28, 2006, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract with the Defendant to purchase 1,861 square meters (hereinafter “the instant sales contract”) prior to C in Hanju-si (hereinafter “the land prior to division”), and paid the Defendant the down payment of KRW 40,000,000 on the same day, and the remainder of KRW 60,000,000 on June 10, 2006, respectively.

B. On October 24, 2006, the land before subdivision was divided into the instant land and the area of 483 square meters prior to Naju-si (hereinafter “D land”).

C. On January 14, 2014, Jeonnam-do completed the registration of ownership transfer for D’s land owned by the Defendant and paid KRW 16,687,650 to the Defendant around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 3 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. We assert that the purchase price of this case alleged by us is KRW 100,000,000, and the defendant is KRW 150,000,000, and thus, we cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim before receiving KRW 50,000,000.

B. (1) The statement of evidence Nos. 1 through 6 on the purchase price of this case alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the purchase price of this case is KRW 100,000,000, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise. According to the evidence No. 1 of this case, although it is found that the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the land prior to subdivision to the Plaintiff on June 9, 2006, the Defendant was aware that the establishment of a mortgage was completed on the land prior to subdivision of the Plaintiff on June 9, 2006, it is insufficient to recognize that the purchase price of this case is KRW 150,00,000, considering the above facts as well as the statement of evidence No. 1 of this case. 6. Rather, there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the purchase price of this case is KRW 120,000,000, in full view of the purport of the argument as stated in

(2) Under Article 568(2) of the Civil Act, the seller is obligated to register the transfer of ownership and the purchaser, according to the judgment on the Defendant’s simultaneous performance defense.