1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff acquired the instant project site on February 15, 2006, in order to newly construct apartment units on the ground of the 4,616 square meters in Northern-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City, and the 410 square meters in F field and G field 2,393 square meters (hereinafter “instant project site”).

B. Upon filing an application for an apartment building permit, the Defendant demanded the Plaintiff to accept the following terms and conditions of the consultation, and the Plaintiff accepted the above terms and conditions of the consultation in order to obtain an apartment building permit.

For the safe passage of neighboring elementary school students, the permission to occupy and use the retaining wall in the H boundary that is planned to install the retaining wall in the plan shall be obtained from the relevant department instead of the retaining wall plan, and the area in conflict with the urban planning road shall be changed to the category of the road by packaging after the cadastral division of the part in conflict with the urban planning road.

C. In accordance with the above consultation terms, the Plaintiff filed an application for land category change to the road category of the instant land in order to divide the instant land into the 513 square meters away from the 2,393 square meters of G Seo-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, North-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant land”) and pack the ice-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City, and to change the land category of the instant land to the road. On November 12, 2007, the land category was changed to the “road”.

The Plaintiff, among the instant project sites, combined (number E after annexation) the remaining land except the instant land, and newly constructed I apartment houses on that ground.

E. The instant land has been provided from November 2007 to the date of the completion of the container package to the date of I’s apartment and neighboring residents’ passage, and the Defendant from around that time managed the instant land by installing crosswalks, speed prevention thresholds, road signs for children’s protection zones, etc. on the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including where there are provisional numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, or images, the result of the on-site inspection by this court, and the purport of the whole pleadings.