1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

(a) The Korea Land and Housing Corporation shall, in implementing a housing site development project of the C District on April 2008, inform that there is a method of supplying migrantss' housing sites, special supply of housing, and payment of resettlement funds by the method of implementing the relocation measures, and "1. Persons to be supplied with the sites

2. A person who receives any business compensation;

3. Persons who have received agricultural compensation of a certain scale or larger (self-employed farmers and lessees) shall be selected;

“To provide the level of 20 square meters or 27 square meters for neighboring living facilities sites or neighboring commercial sites” on the scale of land and supply subject to supply.

B. On September 19, 2017, the Korea Land and Housing Corporation notified the original residents, including the Defendant, to be subject to measures for living in the district, and accordingly, the Defendant acquired the right to be supplied with the land for living countermeasures (hereinafter “instant land for living countermeasures”) from the Korea Land and Housing Corporation (hereinafter “instant land for sale”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. On February 1, 2017, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entered into a contract to purchase the instant purchase price of KRW 20 million from the Defendant through E (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). Although the Defendant should succeed to the status of the Plaintiff as a member so that the Plaintiff can purchase the instant land for countermeasures in accordance with the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff asserted the invalidity of the said sales contract without performing contractual obligations, such as the Defendant’s directly joining the Plaintiff as a member, even though he/she should succeed to the status of the Plaintiff so that the Plaintiff could purchase the instant land for countermeasures, and thus, the Plaintiff’s rescission of the instant sales contract and restitution of the original status or invalidity of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff sought the return of the said KRW 2 million as unjust enrichment.

3. As to whether the Defendant entered into the instant sales contract with the Plaintiff, the health team, Nos. 4, 9 through 5.