1. The Defendant’s KRW 40,000,000 per annum for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from May 18, 2015 to August 9, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 23, 2012, 201, the Dondi City Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Execution Company”) engaged in the business of selling DNA officetels built on the land of Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju and four parcels, and entered into a trust agreement, etc. with the International Trust Co., Ltd. (a later, the name was changed to an International Asset Trust Co., Ltd.; hereinafter “Trust”) and a sales management trust agreement, etc.

The main contents are that the trust company manages the ownership of the business site of an officetel, and the ownership of the officetel is managed by the trust company even if the officetel is newly constructed and registered for preservation in the future.

B. On March 23, 2012, a trust company completed the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on trust in the future on the entire project site of officetels.

C. On March 30, 2015, the Defendant entered into a sales contract for the instant officetel 636 to KRW 67,635,00,00. The sales contract that the Defendant received was written by the seller, but the seller was written as a n&D city development corporation, and there was no indication of the trust company.

On May 18, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a purchase contract with the Defendant to purchase KRW 40,000,000 of the instant officetel 636 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and paid KRW 40,000 to the Defendant on the same day. On the same day, the Plaintiff acquired the status of the buyer by stating the details of the title succession in the sales contract.

E. However, the trust company cannot register the transfer of ownership with respect to the instant officetel 636 on the ground that the sales price for the instant officetel 636 was not deposited in the trust company’s account.

[Ground of recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4 (including paper numbers), and the purport of the whole pleading

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The sales contract of this case constitutes the sale of other party's rights and also the sales contract of this case against the plaintiff.