The plaintiff is the purchaser of the apartment house C, 403-dong 902 (hereinafter "the apartment of this case"), and the defendant is the contractor and the seller of the apartment of this case.

Article 1 (Supply Price and Payment Method) of the conclusion of the sales contract for the apartment of this case: The defendant shall supply the apartment of this case by the following methods and pay the corresponding amount to the defendant. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 17072, Feb. 29, 200; Presidential Decree No. 17008, Feb. 29, 200; Presidential Decree No. 17068, Feb. 29, 2001>

(Amount unit: (1) On May 8, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with the Defendant with regard to the instant apartment on 35,198 21,188 70,396 70,396 70,396 70,396 246,386,386 70,396 70,396 70,396 70,396 246,386, and 386 4 times (as of June 14, 09) more than twice (in the event of moving into the contract) the remainder of the down payment (as of May 14, 09) (as of June 28, 09) as follows.

From May 8, 2009 to December 28, 2009, the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant the sum of KRW 457,574,00 in the intermediate payment and intermediate payment (i.e., KRW 35,198,000 once intermediate payment of KRW 211,18,396,00 in the intermediate payment of KRW 70,396,000 in the three-time intermediate payment of KRW 70,396,00 in the four-time intermediate payment of KRW 70,396,00 in the four-time intermediate payment of KRW 35,198,00.

On the other hand, the plaintiff and the defendant have not fulfilled their obligation to pay the remainder of the sales contract of this case and the ownership transfer obligation of this case.

On June 29, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for commencement of rehabilitation procedures with the Seoul Central District Court 2015dan33, and was decided to commence rehabilitation procedures on July 22, 2015, and the Plaintiff himself/herself was appointed as a custodian on the same day.

(hereinafter “instant rehabilitation procedure”). On December 14, 2015, the Plaintiff, on the ground that the addressee was “the president of the Defendant Company’s representative director D and the 12th floor of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E-building,” both parties’ executory contract under Article 119 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Rehabilitation Act”).