1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The facts below the basic facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 6 (including each number), Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4, and no other counter-proof exists.

On March 14, 2016, the Plaintiff was under construction with a building permit to establish 29 households in Seongdong-gu Seoul and six lots outside Seongdong-gu, Seongdong-gu, and was subject to the Defendant’s civil petition to suspend construction from November 10, 2016 until the implementation of changes in the form and quality and permitted matters are modified, and to instruct the Defendant to correct the violation.

B. Around that time, the Defendant was also under construction permission to newly build multi-family housing on the land outside H of Seongdong-gu Seoul and seven parcels adjacent to the Plaintiff’s land.

C. In order to secure access roads to each of the above apartment houses scheduled to be newly built, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded an agreement to exchange land with the following contents, and the Defendant agreed to bear the expenses necessary for the implementation of the agreement (cadastral division survey expenses and registration tax). Upon completion of the written agreement, both parties submitted all documents necessary for the application for cadastral division and immediately submit all documents necessary for the transfer of ownership at the time of completion of the cadastral division (hereinafter “instant exchange agreement”).

In addition, the plaintiff and the defendant agreed not to file all complaints, such as complaints related to construction works, and not to engage in any act interfering with the construction work of each other.

After changing the area of land category of the land owner before the change, the part of the land owner and the part with no three lot numbers, including D 5.62 and D 3 others, all of the plaintiffs, before the plaintiff 22.96, was specified as a separate drawing, but no drawing was submitted in the instant lawsuit.

34.91 Defendant D et al., Defendant D et al., 7.24, Defendant I 6.80, Defendant I 7.46, et al., Defendant H3.65, et al., prior to Defendant H3.65, et al.