1. The purchase and sale reservation entered into on November 30, 2012 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet between Defendant C and Defendant D.

Facts of recognition

On September 26, 2011, Defendant C drafted to E a letter of payment (hereinafter “instant letter of payment”) stating that “F of Gyeonggi-gun F, G, the amount payable out of the price of the said building shall be KRW 300 million and shall be paid from September 201 to November 2012 on the date of payment (hereinafter “instant letter of payment”).

E on October 7, 2013, transferred the claims under the instant payment note to the Plaintiff, notified the Defendant C thereof, and the said notification reached Defendant C around that time.

In addition, on February 25, 2014, the Plaintiff transferred the above claim to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “ Intervenor”), and notified the Defendant C thereof, and the above notification was delivered to the Defendant C around that time.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 6, Gap evidence No. 9-1, 2, Byung evidence No. 1, 2, 1, and 2, and judgment as to the claim for the agreed amount for the purport of the entire pleadings, there is no dispute between the parties to the instant payment note that the parties to the instant payment note prepared as to the unpaid construction price against the plaintiff by H farming association corporation for which defendant C was the representative director (hereinafter "H").

However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 6, Byung evidence No. 12, it is difficult to see that Eul prepared the letter of payment of this case on behalf of the plaintiff and defendant C, and it is reasonable to determine that E and defendant C prepared the letter of payment of this case in the status of an individual.

If the authenticity of a disposal document is recognized, the court shall, in principle, recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposal document, unless there is any clear and acceptable reflective evidence to deny the contents of the statement. In cases where there is any difference between the parties on the interpretation of a contract, and the interpretation of the intent of the parties indicated in the disposal document is at issue, the contents of the text, the motive