1. The defendant shall pay to an independent party intervenor KRW 107,280,000 as well as his/her annual interest from January 7, 2016 to October 27, 2016.

In fact, on September 25, 2012, an independent party intervenor (hereinafter referred to as "participating") remitted KRW 13 million to the defendant on the basis of recognition.

On May 2, 2014, the Intervenor and the Defendant concluded a joint enforcement agreement (hereinafter “instant agreement”) to jointly construct and settle a commercial building on the ground of Busan Jung-gu D and E (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by the Defendant, which is leased as a parking lot.

The specific details are as follows:

In order to prepare construction cost of KRW 300,000,000 to the Defendant for the construction cost of KRW 100,000 necessary for the authorization and permission of the instant land by the time of the commencement of the construction project, the land price in this case shall be determined in consultation between the Intervenor and the Defendant until the time of the construction authorization and permission, and if the consultation is known, the period shall be three months, and the contract shall be terminated if the consultation is known, the intervenor, on May 2, 2014, required the Plaintiff, who was the Plaintiff, to transfer KRW 10

In addition, on July 2, 2014, the intervenor remitted 10,000 won of the design cost that the Defendant pre-paid to the Defendant, and 10,000 won of the design cost that F was pre-paid to F, respectively.

While the Intervenor failed to prepare the remainder of the case costs and expenses to be borne by the Intervenor under the instant agreement, the Intervenor did not reach an agreement with the Defendant on the purchase price of the instant land under the instant agreement, and the Intervenor urged the Defendant to negotiate on January 2, 2015 with the purchase price of the instant land.

On the other hand, the defendant selected the Si construction work and commenced construction permission on the land of this case.

On May 20, 2015, the Plaintiff had no agreement on the purchase price of the instant land to the Defendant, and expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant agreement on the ground that the Defendant breached the instant agreement by designating the contractor, who is the Plaintiff’s authority, and that this indication reached the Defendant around this time.

The Defendant completed the structural construction of the building on the ground of the instant land.

[Reasons for Recognition] There is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2, Byung.