1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff was the owner of the second floor 2 of the commercial building on land outside Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant real estate”). The Defendant, including the instant real estate, is a housing reconstruction project association established for the purpose of promoting a housing reconstruction project for the relevant apartment and commercial building.

The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff (Seoul Eastern District Court 2010Gahap20585) to the effect that the Plaintiff shall exercise the right to demand sale of the instant real estate (Seoul Eastern District Court 2010Gahap20585), and the said court rendered a judgment that “the Plaintiff shall receive KRW 384,00,000 from the Defendant and, at the same time, implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration for the instant real estate on December 1, 201 and deliver the instant real estate.”

The plaintiff filed an appeal against the above judgment, and the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2012Na58595) decided to recommend reconciliation, and the main contents thereof are as follows.

(hereinafter “Recommendation to Reconciliation of this case”)

1. At the same time, the Plaintiff received KRW 400,000 from the Defendant, while implementing the procedure for ownership transfer registration for the instant real estate on October 31, 2012 to the Defendant by December 1, 2010, and delivering the said real estate.

2. The Defendant shall pay KRW 400,000,000 to the Plaintiff by October 31, 2012 at the same time with the implementation of the procedures for the registration of ownership transfer under paragraph (1) and the delivery of real estate.

3. Although the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer and the performance of the obligation to deliver real estate under paragraph (1), where the Defendant does not fully repay the above KRW 400,000,00, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the unpaid amount plus the amount calculated at the rate of 10% per annum from the day after November 1, 2012 to the day of full payment.

On May 1, 2014, the Plaintiff rendered a final and conclusive decision to recommend the settlement of this case.