1. The defendant is limited to the sale on October 23, 2006 with respect to the real estate stated in the separate sheet to the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is a project implementer of the project to remove the apartment houses located in Gangnam-gu Seoul and D and newly construct the main apartment complex with the third underground floor and the sixth floor above the ground (hereinafter “instant apartment complex”) on the land (hereinafter “instant reconstruction project”).

B. On September 2004, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant with the same club (hereinafter “agreement with the same club”) with the content that the Plaintiff paid the contributions and supplied the instant apartment No. 4 E to the Plaintiff and supplied the instant apartment No. 4 E to the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff paid 140,000,000 won to the Defendant as a contribution.

C. The Defendant selected F Co., Ltd. as the contractor of the instant reconstruction project, and F Co., Ltd. removed the tenement house from March 2006 and constructed the instant apartment house.

On October 23, 2006, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract with the Defendant for the purchase of the instant apartment No. 4 apartment No. 5 on the basis of the instant club agreement.

However, apartment houses can be changed, and the choice of apartment houses was given to the plaintiff.

The purchase price was adjusted to pay 400,000,000 won in total as the apartment price paid by the Plaintiff.

E. The instant apartment was approved for the use on July 10, 2014, and the registration of ownership preservation was completed on July 30, 2015.

F. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff was unable to acquire ownership of the above subparagraph on the wind that the Defendant double sales of the instant apartment No. 4 E to Nonparty G.

[Reasons for Recognition] The fact that there is no dispute or the defendant does not clearly dispute, the entry of Gap 1 through 4, and 9, the witness H's testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the claim, the defendant's interest in the same area at the plaintiff's option instead of the fourth floor E of the apartment of this case, which was originally agreed upon to the plaintiff.