1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 22, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to purchase the building D of Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City at KRW 175 million (a contract deposit of KRW 7 million and a balance of KRW 168 million) with the purchase price of the building D.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). B.

The Plaintiff paid 1 million won out of the down payment on the day of the contract as above, and 160 million won out of the remainder was paid by the loan and the down payment was refunded at the time of loan occurrence, and the special clause stating that “In the event of loan occurrence, the down payment shall be deposited. The date of loan decision shall be March 2, 2018 and the remainder of 6 million won shall be deposited in the down payment” (hereinafter referred to as the “instant special clause”).

C. On March 5, 2018, the Plaintiff paid the remainder down payment to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-4 evidence, Eul 2-1-3 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The meaning of the contents of the instant special agreement asserted by the Plaintiff is that the Defendant returned the down payment if the loan is not executed, and as a result, the Plaintiff did not receive the loan, so the Defendant is liable to return the down payment to the Plaintiff in accordance with the terms of the instant special agreement.

B. We examine whether the condition of “in the event of failure to lend” among the terms of the instant special agreement is satisfied.

The Plaintiff is liable to pay the sale price, barring special circumstances, to proceed with the loan procedures for the sale price under the instant contract.

However, if the meaning of “in the event of failure to lend” is interpreted as “all cases in which loans have not been executed,” it would be very unreasonable for the Plaintiff to assume responsibility for the Defendant even in the case of non-performance of loans due to the Plaintiff’s book.

Therefore, it is reasonable to interpret the term “in the event of failure to obtain a loan” only when it is impossible to obtain a loan.

In this case, the evidence presented by the plaintiff alone is not sufficient to obtain a loan from a financial company.