1. The defendant shall receive KRW 375,688,220 from the plaintiff and at the same time real estate stated in the attached list to the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 21, 2013, the Plaintiff was established with the “Housing Construction Business” as a target business.

B. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Ulsan Metropolitan City Mayor for approval of the housing construction project plan (hereinafter “instant project”) with the content that constructs 11 units of privately-owned apartment units on the ground of the building of 49,860 square meters on the Nam-gu, Ulsan-gu, and 286 parcel of land (hereinafter “instant project site”).

C. The Ulsan Metropolitan City Mayor approved the said housing construction project plan on February 26, 2014 (hereinafter “instant approval”), and around that time, determined a single unit planning zone with a size of 81,705 square meters adjacent to the instant project site, including the instant project site, as a “C district unit planning zone,” and announced the instant approval on March 6, 2014, and announced the purport of the district unit planning zone decision and topographical drawings.

The Defendant acquired the ownership on May 10, 2004 of the real estate in the attached list in the instant project site (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

(e)the relevant provisions, including the Housing Act, concerning the approval of the housing construction project plan and the request for sale by the project undertaker are as shown in Appendix 2;

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 2, fact inquiry results against Ulsan Metropolitan City Mayor, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

가. 매도청구권행사의 가부 ⑴ 주장 ㈎ 원고 ① 원고는 이 사건 사업에 대한 승인을 받고 이 사건 사업대지의 95% 이상에 대해 사용권원을 확보한 사업주체이다.

The ratio of securing the user fee shall not be contested according to the fairness of the approval of this case.

② Since the commencement of a prior negotiation, such as notifying the Defendant of the commencement of compensation consultation on the instant real estate, the Plaintiff was conducting negotiations on the sale of the instant real estate for three months, but did not reach an agreement.

③ The Plaintiff is against the Defendant pursuant to Article 18-2 of the Housing Act at the time of the lapse of at least three months after the commencement of the said negotiations.