1. The Defendant’s KRW 5,618,084 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from November 12, 201 to February 13, 2014.

A. The sales contract of this case becomes null and void and thus unjust enrichment is the cost of the basic living facilities included in the sales price. However, as seen earlier, the Defendant calculated the sales price of this case by deducting the cost of the basic living facilities calculated by the Defendant within the extent not exceeding 80% of the cost of the construction of the housing site calculated by the Defendant. Therefore, the portion of unjust enrichment is the amount exceeding the “justifiable sale price” (the cost of the housing site formation - the cost of the basic living facilities) from the sales price of this case calculated by the Defendant as above. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s unjust enrichment amount can be calculated according to the following formula. Thus, the Plaintiff’s supply of a housing site in Article 41-2(2)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Public Works Act as amended on April 17, 2008 also requires the project operator to calculate the cost to be borne by the project operator on the basis of the area of the housing site supplied. * The legitimate sale price of the housing site per square meter = (the cost of the basic living facilities) / entire Plaintiff’s price of the housing site supplied at the appraisal price per general consumers (the appraisal price).

However, the defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted in light of the following points.

(1) The appraised price of a housing site shall be estimated market price and its starting point is different from the conceptually different from the development cost of the housing site.

The cost of installing basic living facilities may be clarified in the course of calculating the cost of housing site development.