1. The Defendant is based on the sale on November 18, 2014, with respect to the area of 93 square meters prior to Gwangju Nam-gu Seoul metropolitan area to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 2, 2014, the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff, purchased from the Defendant for KRW 27,625,000 land of Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Gwangju (hereinafter “instant land”). On July 4, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased KRW 366,00 from the Defendant for KRW 27,625,00.

B. On November 18, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased from the Defendant the area of 93 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) located in the front of the instant land No. 1 and paid KRW 8.4 million to the Defendant on the same day.

C. On September 7, 2016, F, who is the father of the Plaintiff, paid all the purchase price of KRW 8.4 million to the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant sent a certification of the content requesting the Defendant to implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer concerning the land No. 2. Accordingly, on November 18, 2014, the remainder of the land No. 1, which was received from the Plaintiff, was 8.4 million won. As to the land No. 2 of this case, the Defendant was aware that the area was 18 square meters, and received the purchase price in cash, but it was confirmed that the area of the land No. 2 of this case was 28 square meters, and thereafter, the Plaintiff could complete the registration of ownership transfer only if it is required to additionally pay KRW 3 million.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. In order to secure access roads after the Plaintiff purchased the land No. 1 of this case, the Plaintiff purchased the land of this case from the Defendant in addition to the land No. 2 of this case, and paid 8.4 million won in full.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration on the second land of this case to the plaintiff.

B. The purchase price of the land No. 2 of this case was 28 million won, and 8.4 million won among them, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with.

3. In this case, whether the purchase price of the land No. 2 in this case was 8.4 million won or not, as alleged by the Plaintiff, or whether it was 28 million won as alleged by the Defendant.