1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a rental business operator who constructed and leases a D apartment pursuant to the Rental Housing Act on the ground of the Ysan-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Jeonju-si.

B. Around May 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the said apartment 7-dong 509 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) with the terms of KRW 5,56,300, and monthly rent of KRW 54,100 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) without setting the lease term.

C. On April 26, 2010, after the expiry of the mandatory rental period under the Rental Housing Act, the Defendant applied for approval for conversion of the sale for sale in lots to the head of Busan Metropolitan City on April 26, 2010 and obtained approval for conversion for sale in lots on May 14, 2010.

On May 17, 2010, June 9, 2010, June 28, 2010, June 28, 2010, and November 14, 2010, the defendant sent a notice to tenants including the defendant to prepare application documents for conversion for sale in lots, such as lease contract, resident registration certificate, certificate of personal seal impression, receipt of down payment, receipt of rent and management expenses, receipt of deposit payment, and a non-resident pledge, and notified the third party that the relevant house is sold to the third party if the lessee does not comply with conversion for sale in lots for at least six months under the Rental Housing Act.

E. The Defendant sold the instant apartment to E on June 14, 2012, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 23, 2012 with respect to the said apartment.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 through 5 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On November 12, 2010, the Plaintiff asserted that he applied for conversion for sale in lots to the Defendant through F of the Management Office of the instant apartment on the ground that the Plaintiff submitted an application form for conversion for sale in lots to the Defendant, but the Defendant illegally sold the said apartment to E without complying therewith.

Therefore, the Defendant’s damages (i.e., the market price of KRW 70 million as of the apartment of this case - the sale price of KRW 40 million at the present apartment of this case) and its related thereto.