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

A. A. Around May 2008, the Plaintiff purchased from Defendant C the F apartment sales right (hereinafter “instant sales right”) in total of KRW 180,000,000 and KRW 230,000,000,000,000 paid to its members, which is scheduled for the purchase of the F apartment units E in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E (hereinafter “instant sales right”).

B. For the payment of the purchase price of the instant sales right, the Plaintiff paid or remitted to Defendant D KRW 3 million on May 23, 2008, and KRW 49 million on July 10, 2008, respectively, to Defendant B in cash, and ② transferred to Defendant B KRW 180 million on May 26, 2008, and KRW 10 million on June 2, 2008.

C. The above A.

On April 1, 2012 and October 26, 2012, G District Housing Association (hereinafter “instant association”) as an implementer of a new apartment construction project as stated in paragraph (1) (hereinafter “instant association”) announced its members to submit evidentiary documents to determine the exact details of the contributions paid by its members and the number of its members on the ground that the executive branch was changed and the data related to the payment of contributions were not handed over. On March 14, 2013, the G District Housing Association (hereinafter “instant association”) notified its members of the fact that they will withdraw or remove from the position of its members if they did not report the details of payments within the reporting period.

【Defendant C’s Grounds for Recognition: Defendant B and D’s absence of dispute under Article 208(3)3(a) of the Civil Procedure Act; the records in the evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including branch numbers, if any); the fact-finding with respect to G regional housing associations of this court; the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Although Defendant C did not pay the shares of the association members related to the sales right of this case, as if performed, Defendant C deceiving the Plaintiff and sold the sales right of this case corresponding to the so-called so-called “water-saving area” to the Plaintiff. Defendant B and D actually sell the sales right of this case to the Plaintiff.