1. The part concerning the claim for child support among the instant lawsuit is dismissed.

2. The defendant shall pay 46,000,000 won to the plaintiff and this.

1. Fact-finding;

A. The plaintiff and the defendant married around October 1998, and among them, they have a minor marriage C.

On July 19, 2004, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed on July 19, 2004 to designate a person exercising parental authority over his father and wife as the Plaintiff, and the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff KRW 1,50,000 per month for child support (hereinafter “Agreement 1”).

B. On May 25, 2007, the Plaintiff and the Defendant: (a) disposed of the instant land acquired in the Defendant’s name in the Defendant’s name in the marriage (hereinafter “instant land”); (b) instead of disposing of the Defendant, the Defendant awarded a successful bid for the instant apartment Nos. 203-dong 102 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) under the process of auction to the Plaintiff; and (c) concluded that the Plaintiff will complete the registration of ownership transfer (hereinafter “second agreement”).

However, as the third party acquired the ownership by winning a successful bid for the apartment of this case on October 11, 2007 in the above auction procedure, the defendant was unable to implement the second agreement.

At the time, the market price of the apartment of this case is 46,000,000 won.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 11, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. As to the claim for child support under the agreement under Article 1, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the child support of KRW 10,500,000 for seven months from January 1, 2015 to July 31, 2015 pursuant to the first agreement.

The plaintiff's claim for this part is a claim for the payment of child support based on the first agreement, which is a specific consultation about child support while divorced by the plaintiff and the defendant. It is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the family court as a family non-litigation case under Article 2 (1) 2(e)(3) of the Family Litigation Act, and it cannot be tried by combining these cases in civil litigation proceedings.

Therefore, the part of the claim for child support among the claims in this case is unlawful and thus dismissed.

B. According to the above fact of recognition as to the claim for damages under the agreement under Article 2, the defendant 2.