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

However, at the time of the above sales contract, the right to purchase the living countermeasure site of this case can only become the object of the supply of the living countermeasure site, and only the partnership can enter into the sales contract lawfully as to the living countermeasure site. In the case of the sales contract, only the change of the name as a whole can be possible only once, and it is not allowed for the partnership members to transfer their shares individually.

The above sales contract is null and void since the defendant did not notify the plaintiff of the above contents and sold the right to purchase the land for the countermeasures of this case to the plaintiff.

(A) The Defendant shall return to the Plaintiff the above purchase price of KRW 71 million as unjust enrichment. The Defendant shall return to the Plaintiff the above purchase price of KRW 71 million.

2. In full view of the facts and circumstances as indicated below, the following facts are not sufficient to recognize the seller as the defendant, i.e., the other party to a sales contract on June 10, 2008 asserted by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The plaintiff's assertion on the premise that the party to the above sales contract is the defendant is without merit.

On the other hand, while the plaintiff was active as a part of the FF association, it seems that the plaintiff was aware of the original impossibility of selling the land for taking measures of this case as asserted by the plaintiff at the time of the above sales contract.