1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. On March 28, 1996, C Housing Association (hereinafter “Inward Association”) obtained authorization for the establishment of housing association from the head of Dongjak-gu Seoul head of the Gu in accordance with the Housing Act and subordinate statutes in order to construct apartment buildings of 129 households with six parcels, including Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F, as business area.

B. Around May 8, 2009, the Plaintiff received two copies of the “certificate of receipt of an application for membership of an association” (hereinafter “certificate of receipt of this case”) from the Defendant against the non-party association, in which the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s son were the applicants, and paid KRW 50,000,000 in total to the Defendant on June 26, 2009 and June 10, 200,000,000 on June 27, 2009.

C. On November 13, 2012, the non-party association applied for approval of a project plan within two years from the date of authorization of establishment pursuant to the Housing Act and subordinate statutes, but the association was revoked in violation of this.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As examined below, the defendant's judgment on this safety defense is not the defendant, but the non-party partnership that entered into a sales contract, and thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant for the refund of the sales price paid on the grounds of the cancellation of the above sales contract is an unlawful lawsuit against the non-party who is not the defendant.

In the litigation for performance, a person who is claimed as a performance obligor by the plaintiff has the standing to be the defendant.

The defendant's defense is without merit.

3. Judgment on the merits

A. (1) On May 8, 2009, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff purchased the right to purchase an apartment unit of 32 square meters (hereinafter “instant right”) from the Defendant from the Defendant from KRW 50,000,000, respectively, in the name of the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s ASEAN, to KRW 25,000,000. At the time of the said sales contract, the Defendant can purchase the apartment unit of 32 square meters from the Plaintiff after one year to that time.