1. The defendant has regard to the real estate stated in the attached list to the plaintiff (Appointed Party) A, Appointed C, and D.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 26, 1986, the Defendant completed the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”) under Article 27681 of the receipt of the Dobong District Court of Seoul Northern District as to the portion of 4/45 of E among the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

E died on November 25, 1989, and the plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties inherited E.

B. On November 27, 1998, a civil procedure (U.S. District Court 98Gahap19762), initiated between the Defendant and F, conciliation was concluded with the following contents: “The Defendant was paid KRW 18 million from F, and at the same time, he/she performed the procedure for the registration of share transfer to F with respect to the shares of the Defendant, including the instant real estate. Taxes and public charges imposed on the Defendant following the performance thereof shall be borne by F.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The right to make the other party to the purchase and sale effective by expressing his/her intention to complete the purchase and sale in the unilateral promise as stipulated in Article 564 of the Civil Act (so-called right to complete the purchase and sale) is a kind of right of creation, if there is an agreement between the parties to exercise the period of exercise, it shall be exercised within such period, and if there is no such agreement, within 10 years after the establishment of the promise, it shall be exercised within the period of limitation, and when the above period expires, the right to complete the reservation shall be extinguished upon the expiration of the limitation period. Since the Defendant entered into the promise with E on April 26, 1986, it shall exercise the right to complete the reservation within 10 years from that time, since the Defendant exercised the right to complete the reservation, there is no ground to view that the Defendant exercised the right to complete the reservation with the limitation period.

B. Accordingly, according to the above mediation, the defendant should bear F's tax and public charges, and it does not pay it.