1. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance, including the Plaintiff’s claim expanded at the trial.

1. Judgment as to the main claim

A. 1) On September 7, 2007, the Plaintiff is deemed to be the Defendant Daeduri Incorporated Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”).

2) The forest land of this case is the forest land of this case and 783m2 (hereinafter “the forest of this case”).

A) Of the sales contracts, the sales amount of KRW 58,00,000 for KRW 330.258 square meters is determined (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

After the conclusion of the contract, the Defendant Company paid KRW 58,00,000 to the purchase price. 2) On September 18, 2007, the Defendant Company completed the registration of ownership transfer under the Plaintiff’s name on September 7, 2007 with respect to the share of KRW 330/783 out of the forest land of this case and the share of KRW 25/595 out of 330/783 square meters out of the forest land of this case and 595 square meters in Chuncheon-si

Meanwhile, in the real estate register, the transaction value of the above shares in the forest of this case is KRW 57,500,000, and the transaction value of the above shares in the forest of this case is KRW 500,000, respectively.

3) At the time of the instant sales contract, Defendant B and C, an employee of the Defendant Company, explained to the Plaintiff that “this case’s forest is adjacent to the road and expected to be developed into the city district, so the land price is to be multiplied within three years.” The Plaintiff believed the aforementioned explanation by the said Defendants, and purchased part of the instant forest from the Defendant Company as above. However, at the time of the instant sales contract, there was no special reason for misunderstanding the price of the instant forest and its surrounding land, such as the scheduled development plan, etc., for the instant forest and its surrounding land. Meanwhile, the market price of 330/783 out of the instant forest, which was around September 18, 2007, was exceeded KRW 1,122,00,00.

[Based on recognition] Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Gap evidence 4-1, 2, Gap evidence 5, and 6-1, 5, and 6-2, the result of the evaluation of the market price of the party appraiser G, the fact-finding results in the fact-finding in the trial of the party, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. The process and object of concluding the instant sales contract, known from the fact of the occurrence of liability for damages.