1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. The B reconstruction and rearrangement project association (hereinafter “the reconstruction association of this case”) was established to implement the housing reconstruction project on the land outside Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and 40 parcels. The Plaintiff is a person who owned the housing within the said reconstruction project zone and was working as a director of the reconstruction association of this case.

B. On August 8, 2008, the Defendant is a building company that entered into a contract with the instant reconstruction association to construct a new D apartment within the reconstruction project zone, along with the volcanic Construction Co., Ltd.

C. On December 18, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply of D apartment units 37.7 square meters (124.684 square meters) to the members of the Association to sell 51,450,000 won (the Plaintiff’s housing owned by the Plaintiff shall be assessed as 339,541,01 won and the amount of actual charges shall be assessed as 171,908,989 won) to the members of the Association.

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). D.

The reconstruction association of this case held an extraordinary general meeting on January 29, 201, and passed the design change agenda on the agenda No. 1, and accordingly, the Plaintiff was changed to 37.7 square meters (the inside structure of the apartment, the location of bearing walls, etc. are changed) to 38.2 square meters, and the Plaintiff’s actual charges increased to 188,84,359 won.

E. Upon completion of the foregoing D apartment around August 2013, the instant reconstruction association completed the registration of initial ownership in the Plaintiff’s name with respect to the said apartment Nos. 103, 1404 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) on October 8, 2013, and the Plaintiff occupied the instant apartment around December 20, 2013.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap’s 1 through 6, 14, 23, Eul’s 1 and 2 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. As the design of the above D apartment 37.7 square meters, which the Plaintiff claimed to purchase, was changed to 38.2 square meters, the design was 38.2 square meters due to the erroneous design modification.