Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. The defendant is the plaintiff's birth.

B. On July 13, 2009, the Plaintiff completed the provisional registration of the right to claim partial transfer of ownership (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”) on the real estate listed in the attached list, owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant land”). On July 13, 2009, the Plaintiff completed the provisional registration of the right to claim partial transfer of ownership (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”).

C. Of the sales reservation agreement entered into by the Plaintiff and the Defendant prior to the instant provisional registration (hereinafter “instant provisional registration”), Article 2 of the said agreement states that “The date of completion of the sales reservation shall be July 9, 2014, and the said date of completion shall be deemed to have been completed as a matter of course, even if the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not express its intent to complete the sales transaction prior to the instant provisional registration (hereinafter “instant trade reservation”).”

[Judgment of the court below] The ground for recognition is without merit, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the ground for appeal

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. (1) As to the exclusion period Do and argument of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff asserts that the provisional registration of this case was completed on July 9, 2014 with respect to the shares of the Defendant and the Defendant, setting the date of the completion of the reservation, and that even if the Defendant acquired the right to complete the purchase and sale reservation based on the reservation of this case, the right to complete the purchase and sale reservation ceases to exist ten years after the date of establishment of the reservation of this case, and that the Defendant is liable to implement the procedure of registration of cancellation of the provisional

(2) The fact that the Plaintiff entered into a pre-sale agreement with the Defendant on July 9, 2014, stating that “the date of the completion of the purchase and sale reservation shall be the date of the completion of the purchase and sale reservation, and shall be deemed to have been completed as a matter of course without the Defendant’s resolution on the completion of the purchase and sale, even if the said date has passed,” is as recognized earlier. Therefore, the Defendant did not separately express its intent to exercise the Plaintiff’s right to the full completion of the sale reservation.

(b)if any;