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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. The Plaintiff’s business promotion process 1) The Plaintiff is a reinforced concrete building (D main complex building; hereinafter “instant building”) with the total floor area of 17,350.5 square meters in the size of 20 stories underground and 20 stories above the ground in Daegu Jung-gu, Daegu-gu.

plan to build a new building (hereinafter referred to as the “instant construction project”) and plan to build a new building;

(2) On October 12, 2012, the building committee of Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan City filed an application for a construction deliberation with the Jung-gu Office. 2) The building committee of Jung-gu Office made a deliberation and resolution on the conditional resolution of the Plaintiff’s application for a construction deliberation on November 5, 2012. The Plaintiff filed an application for a building permission on January 17, 2013 and received a building permit on May 12, 2014, on the condition that the Plaintiff secure ownership of the site on 22 lots, including the 11.6 square meters in Daegu-gu and 38.7 square meters in lots (hereinafter “second land”).

B. 1) The Plaintiff purchased and owned the land owned by the Defendant in around 1982, and around 1997, the Defendant was awarded a bid for 2/9 shares in the land owned by G in the name of G. (2) The Plaintiff decided to purchase the land for KRW 400 million from the Defendant around January 2013, and prepared a real estate sale declaration (Evidence A2-1) between the Defendant and the Defendant. (B) On April 8, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a real estate sales contract again with the content that the purchase price for 1/3 shares in the land owned by the Defendant was KRW 40 million, and the shares for 2/3 shares are paid to 6 households in the instant building as an officetel.

C) On April 25, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant revised a sales contract with the purchase price of KRW 400 million for the portion of KRW 1/6 out of land, and the share of KRW 3/6 was paid to five households among the instant buildings. D) to the Defendant, the Plaintiff: (i) KRW 200 million for the Defendant who was incurred during the consultation on purchase of the land on March 31, 2014; and (ii) the land on April 9, 2014.