1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 2, 2010, the Defendant concluded a sales contract with the husband E of D, the nominal owner of the land, setting the sales price of KRW 450,00,00 with respect to the land prior to C, which was KRW 4,959 square meters (hereinafter “the land prior to the instant subdivision”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 31, 2010.

B. On July 15, 2010, the area of 4,959 square meters prior to C was divided into 4,950 square meters and 9 square meters prior to C on July 15, 201, and the area of 4,950 square meters prior to C on June 7, 2011 was divided into 660 square meters prior to C on June 7, 2011 (hereinafter “instant land”) and 3,300 square meters prior to G on 99 square meters and 3,300 square meters prior to H.

C. On January 31, 2011, 201, the Plaintiff shared with J the land of 578 square meters of I-si I-si I-do (hereinafter “I-do”) but completed the registration of the transfer of ownership on the ground of donation.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. On February 3, 2010, the summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion or the Defendant’s husband’s husband, who represented the Defendant, agreed on February 3, 2010 to transfer the Plaintiff’s land to the Plaintiff at the time of donation in exchange for the Defendant’s use as an access road to the land prior to the instant partition. On October 1, 2016, the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 57 million to the Plaintiff in lieu of transferring the ownership of the instant land. After that, on November 1, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 57 million by reducing the said KRW 57 million from the said KRW 57 million.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above agreed amount of KRW 50 million.

B. According to the reasoning of the judgment, the Plaintiff’s testimony as stated in the evidence Nos. 1, 11, and 14, and witness of the trial of the party branch, if the Plaintiff had made an agreement to transfer the ownership of the land equivalent to 200 square meters out of the land before the instant subdivision to the Plaintiff at the time of donation so that it can be used as a road for entering the land before the instant subdivision between K and the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff is KRW 50 million to the Defendant around November 2016.