1. The plaintiff's claim that the court changed in exchange is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff’s total costs of litigation.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus cite it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant’s obligation to deliver the Defendant’s instant charnel to the Plaintiff for the sale of the 4,000 period for the 4,00 boxes of the instant charnel house in accordance with the instant conciliation protocol was converted to the Defendant’s obligation to deliver a wing document regarding “the wing box that falls under the 1,969 unit and the wing box that falls under the 1,969 unit and the wing box that falls under the individual group,” and the Plaintiff’s receipt and confirmation of the said wing document.

However, at the time of January 22, 2009, at the time when the Defendant delivered the above inurnment certificate to the Plaintiff, the couple group that the Defendant could deliver to the Plaintiff at the instant charnel house remains 1,542 (=the existing couple group 1,942 - the already sold 400).

Thus, the shortage of husband and wife 427 (1,969 - 1,542) cannot be deemed as having been fulfilled the defendant's duty to deliver a draft of a document to the plaintiff on the ground that it was not established among the above draft of a document where it is impossible to realize the finalized benefit.

Therefore, until February 13, 2009, the Defendant did not deliver to the Plaintiff a 4,000 strawet for sale as to the 4,000 strawet for the instant charnel house out of the 4,000 strawet for sale. Therefore, the instant conciliation protocol provisions

1. By February 13, 2009, the Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff a certificate of merit for sale with respect to the period of 4,000 out of the 4,000 boxes of the instant charnel houses. If the Defendant fails to perform this by the above date, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to KRW 900,000,000 and the amount at the rate of 20% per annum from February 14, 2009 to the date of complete payment.

Pursuant to this, the Plaintiff shall be paid the amount of KRW 900,000,000 as well as the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from February 14, 2009 to the date of full payment.

B. The above findings of the recognition are as follows.