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

A. On July 1, 2004, Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) newly constructed a multi-household house (hereinafter “instant multi-household house”) on the ground of 357m2 in Yangcheon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant multi-household house”) owned by E, etc. between E and E, and as a result, entered into a contract under which, instead of paying the construction cost, the said multi-household house was transferred to E, etc. (hereinafter “instant multi-household 401, 402, 501, and 502 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. On May 24, 2005, Defendant Company filed a lawsuit against E, etc. seeking implementation of the procedure for ownership transfer registration regarding the instant multi-household house 401, etc. on September 13, 2012 (Seoul High Court Decision 201Na73627). The judgment on November 8, 2012 became final and conclusive.

[Reasons for Recognition] The substantial facts in this Court, Gap evidence 2-1 and Gap evidence 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The allegations by the parties and the determination thereof

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) concluded each construction contract between the Defendant Company and the 8 generation of the instant multi-household housing, with the content that the instant multi-household housing is to be paid as a substitute for the instant multi-household housing, and that part of the construction cost is to be paid as a substitute for the instant multi-household housing, and H and I, a director, had H and I do so according to each construction contract.

(2) In addition, around August 201, the Plaintiff received from H and I the claim for ownership transfer registration and construction cost claim against the Defendant Company Nos. 501 and 402.

(3) The Defendant Company implements the registration procedure for ownership transfer of the instant multi-household housing in accordance with each of the above construction contracts or the assignment of claims.