1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall pay to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) KRW 15,853,504 with full payment from January 9, 2014.

A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. In fact, the forest land B 38,876 square meters (hereinafter “instant forest”) was owned by C. However, C applied for permission for conversion of a mountainous district for the purpose of constructing a multi-family house in the instant forest, and obtained permission for conversion of a mountainous district for the period of permission from Gangseo-si, around January 31, 2009 to December 31, 2009.

The Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant forest land on December 9, 2009, and obtained permission from Gangnam-si to extend the period of permission for the said conversion to December 31, 2010.

On April 7, 2010, the Plaintiff sold all of the pine trees in the instant forest to the Defendant for KRW 320 million, and the Plaintiff was responsible until it extracted and recovered pine trees.

The Defendant removed the remaining pine trees except for the boundary of the instant forest from April 2010 to October 2010, and paid a total of KRW 243 million to the Plaintiff with the purchase price.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1-4 evidence, fact-finding results on Gangnam Viewers, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the principal claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid purchase price of KRW 77 million (=320 million-243 million) and damages for delay.

3. Determination as to the defendant's assertion and the cause of counterclaim

A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant paid KRW 263 million out of the purchase price to the Plaintiff. 2) Even though the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to leave the remaining pine trees, the Defendant refused to deliver the remaining pine trees worth KRW 146 million at the market price of 149 million due to the Plaintiff’s neglect of doing so and closing the remaining pine trees to the transport of trees. The sales contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was lawfully rescinded by the Defendant’s declaration of intention of partial rescission as a counterclaim on the ground of the Plaintiff’s refusal of performance.

Therefore, the plaintiff can not claim the payment of the remaining purchase and sale to the defendant.