1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

2. The total cost of the lawsuit is the intervenor who subscribed for the lawsuit.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for amendments as set forth below, and thus, this case is cited in accordance with the main sentence

[Supplementary part] The 3rd reason of the 2nd reason is to add the “Plaintiff’s Acceptance Intervenor” in front of the “SPC Co., Ltd.”.

5 The following shall be added to 5 pages:

“3) The land trust contract between the Plaintiff and Sungwon L&C was terminated on February 22, 2017, and all the rights and obligations of the Plaintiff relating to the trust business were comprehensively succeeded to Sungwon L&C.

Sungwon L&C accepted the instant lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiff in this court.

The 5th five parallels "Plaintiffs" shall be raised to "Plaintiffs Acceptance Intervenors". 7th 2) shall be raised as follows:

In addition, considering the aforementioned circumstances, it is difficult to view that sending to the Plaintiff the official letter stating that the Defendant is able to sell the number of each of the instant lands on November 7, 2013, that the time of sale on November 19, 2013 is the overall period of 2014, that the time of sale on November 19, 2013, and that sending the official letter stating sending the results of appraisal and cadastral survey for sale on December 2, 2013 is an act of giving the Plaintiff a legitimate expectation or trust that the sales contract for each of the instant lands was concluded around the overall period of 2014. The Plaintiff’s assertion as to tort liability also is without merit.

2. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case by the Intervenor is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.