1. Upon receipt of a claim for change in exchange at the trial, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 50,000,000, and the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 50,00.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 29, 2012, a check was withdrawn in KRW 30 million from the Plaintiff’s account, and the said check was paid to the Defendant via Dong G and C (B).

B. On April 19, 2012, from the Plaintiff’s account to the Defendant’s account, KRW 20 million was transferred.

C. On April 28, 2016, C transferred to the Plaintiff a loan claim of KRW 50 million against the Defendant, and notified the Defendant on May 10, 2016, by content-certified mail, which is a certificate with a fixed date.

And the above notification of assignment of claims reached the defendant on May 11, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 5 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), testimony of the witness C of the first instance trial, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion C lent a total of KRW 50 million to the Defendant, and C transferred the above loan claim against the Defendant to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of 50 million won for the acquisition of the claim and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that C would request the Defendant to purchase the land owned by the Defendant, thereby receiving the said money as part of the down payment.

Therefore, C is required to respond to the sale with the defendant, and C is not implementing this, and the above contract is terminated by C's breach of contract. Therefore, the defendant has no reason to respond to the plaintiff's request.

3. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, and Eul’s testimony and arguments as witnesses of the first instance trial, G and C proposed that they will give 50 million won in the sense that they will give priority to the defendant for the land, other than the Busan East-gu E (hereinafter “instant land”), which is owned by the defendant. Accordingly, the defendant can receive the said money as the down payment, since a sales contract for the instant land has already been concluded with another person and the double sale problems, such as double sale, may occur.