1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. An apartment supply contract on June 12, 2014 with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and the whole arguments as to the cause of the claim, it is acknowledged that the plaintiff entered into an apartment supply contract with the defendant on June 12, 2014 with the content that the plaintiff purchases real estate listed in the separate sheet for KRW 142,50,000 (hereinafter "the apartment supply contract of this case") and thus, the defendant is obligated to carry out the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer based on the above apartment supply contract and deliver the above real estate to the plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. On April 2014, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant received KRW 2,150,00,000 from Jinju-si Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”). At the time, D, the representative director of B, was obligated to settle the amount of KRW 110,00,00 for the Plaintiff who was the former representative director, and entered into the instant apartment supply contract with the Plaintiff as collateral.

On the other hand, around March 2013, the Plaintiff prepared a letter of waiver that the consent to the construction permit of the above apartment construction project will not be used as the access road to apartment buildings to E. However, the Defendant was bound to suspend the construction work of the access road necessary for the above apartment construction project due to the waiver note. Accordingly, the Defendant incurred a loss equivalent to KRW 509,388,199, in total, KRW 271,388,199, interest on loans due to the delay in construction for 14 months, KRW 140,000, KRW 1400,000, and KRW 98,000,000, total of field construction supervision pension for 14 months.

Despite the Plaintiff’s duty to notify the Defendant of all the conditions known to the Plaintiff at the time of entering into the apartment supply contract of this case, the Plaintiff did not notify the Defendant of the fact that the Plaintiff prepared and ordered the above waiver letter, which is an important content of the contract. Accordingly, the Defendant suffered enormous damages.