1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. Upon the plaintiff's conjunctive claim added by this court, the defendant.

1. The reasoning of this court’s judgment as to the primary claim is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the conjunctive claim

A. On January 26, 2017, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant building project was approved by the head of the Dong/Dong.

On February 6, 2017, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of its intention to complete the instant sales reservation upon the delivery of the preparatory documents.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the agreed purchase price of KRW 1170,000,000,000 to the Plaintiff while taking the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer of the instant real estate and deliver the said real estate.

B. Determination 1) The instant promise was concluded on the condition that the Plaintiff obtained the authorization of the project implementation or the approval of the project from the competent authority regarding the instant building project. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff obtained the approval of the instant construction project from the head of the Dong-dong on January 26, 2017, and the Plaintiff exercised the right to complete the purchase and sale settlement with the Defendant on February 6, 2017, and on the same day, reached the Defendant. Ultimately, the instant sales contract, which is the main contract, was established on the instant real estate on February 6, 2017 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, was concluded. Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant, barring any special circumstance, is obligated to implement the ownership transfer registration procedure on the ground of the completion of the purchase and sale settlement and deliver the said real estate to the Plaintiff on February 6, 2017.2) The Defendant asserts that the instant construction project approval was revoked, and thus, it cannot be readily concluded that the instant condition was fulfilled.

The filing of administrative litigation alone is insufficient to recognize that the terms of the instant reservation have not been fulfilled.