1. The Defendant’s promise to sell and purchase real estate listed in the separate sheet between C shall be revoked on February 26, 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 17, 2010, the Plaintiff lent KRW 80 million to C as of October 30, 2010 (hereinafter “instant loan”). The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit with the Gwangju District Court 2013Kadan9661 against C to seek the loan principal and the damages for delay thereof, and the said court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on August 22, 2013 (hereinafter “the instant judgment”), and on which C appealed appealed to the Gwangju District Court 2013Na1870, but the said court dismissed the said appeal on April 11, 2014, and this judgment became final and conclusive on May 15, 2014.

B. On January 6, 2014, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed as to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) on January 6, 2014, and on January 6, 2014, the provisional registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”) was completed on the ground of the pre-sale promise (hereinafter “instant pre-sale promise”) on February 26, 2014.

C. At this time, the instant building was the sole property of C at the time of the instant reservation and provisional registration, and the former Agricultural Cooperative was the principal of KRW 190 million against C and its interest claim. At the same time, the appraisal price of the instant building was KRW 38 million.

On October 27, 2014, the Plaintiff received a collection order, based on the instant judgment, to seize C’s claim against C as the obligor and the Defendant as the third obligor, and to the effect that C’s claim against the Defendant was seized by 2014T as of October 27, 2014.

A claim seized and collected was the amount that the Defendant would depend on the instant loan and delay damages out of the real estate sales amount that the Defendant would pay to C on the ground of the instant promise to trade.

When the above decision was served on the defendant, the defendant set the time limit for the promise to sell this case to the court on October 31, 2014.