1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be acknowledged either in dispute between the parties or in combination with the whole purport of the pleadings as stated in the evidence Nos. 1-2, 2, 4, 5, Eul evidence No. 2, 3, 6, Eul evidence No. 7-1 to 5:

On October 31, 2011, the Plaintiff purchased 4,269 square meters and 180 square meters for E forest land from Nonparty C prior to Jeju-si. Around that time, the Plaintiff agreed to divide part of D land into the Defendant.

On December 13, 2011, the plaintiff among the above D land on December 13, 2011, as to the share 3,724/4,269, the defendant completed the registration of transfer of each ownership (share) with respect to the share 545/4,269.

B. On February 29, 2012, the said land was divided into Fro (the land category is changed to a road thereafter) and Gro (the land category is changed to a subsequent site) with the previous 406 square meters. In this case, the said F and G land were entirely owned by the Defendant, and D land was completely owned by the Plaintiff, due to the transfer of ownership between the original and the Defendant.

(However, the above G land was transferred to Nonparty H on the same day).

However, on December 12, 2012, the Defendant, on February 14, 2012, issued the Daegu District Court Decision 201Kadan1360 rendered a provisional disposition on the prohibition of disposal as the right to preserve the claim for the registration of ownership transfer based on the division of common property on February 14, 2012.

On July 15, 2013, the Plaintiff sold the land, etc. D after the said subdivision to Nonparty I and J. In this case, the Plaintiff and the aforementioned buyers agreed to receive KRW 80 million out of the purchase price between the Plaintiff and Defendant 3 in return for the release of the execution of the provisional injunction prohibiting disposition.

E. On August 8, 2013, the Defendant received the agreed 80 million won as above and applied for the cancellation of the execution of the provisional disposition prohibiting disposition, and on August 9, 2013, the registration of the provisional disposition was cancelled.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant to provide part of the 4,269 square meters prior to the aforementioned subdivision as a road. However, the said agreement was concluded.