1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B is the Seoul Southern District Court's Guro registry office as to the apartment as stated in the attached list.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 4, 2006, the Plaintiff entered into a pre-sale agreement with Defendant B to sell apartment units for KRW 150,000,000,000 as stated in the separate sheet. At the same time, the Plaintiff received 20,000,000 as the pre-sale deposit from Defendant B, and at the same time completed the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer on the ground of the pre-sale agreement with Defendant B.

B. After the completion of the pre-sale agreement after the lapse of December 30, 2006 pursuant to the above pre-sale agreement, Defendant B agreed to waive all rights arising from the sale and purchase agreement and the sales agreement if the remainder is not paid by March 10, 2007 between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff on February 23, 2007.

C. On February 9, 2011, Defendant Republic of Korea seized Defendant B’s right to claim ownership transfer due to the disposition on default of national taxes, and completed the additional registration of seizure against Defendant B’s right to claim ownership transfer on February 11, 201.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence No. 1 to No. 4 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. As long as there is no evidence to deem that Defendant B paid the balance by March 10, 2007, Defendant B renounced all rights, such as the right to claim ownership transfer pursuant to the trade reservation pursuant to the above agreement, the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer pursuant to the trade reservation made in the name of Defendant B is invalid.

B. Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to implement the procedure for the cancellation registration of provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer, and the defendant Republic of Korea, which completed the additional registration by seizing the right to claim ownership transfer extinguished as above, has the duty of substantive law to accept the procedure for cancellation registration of the plaintiff, who is the person entitled to registration.

3. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants is accepted.