1.The part concerning the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be modified as follows:

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim).

1. In the first instance court’s trial scope, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of the purchase price following the exercise of the right to demand a ground object as the principal lawsuit. The Defendant, as the principal counterclaim, filed a claim for the removal of buildings and the delivery of land based on the expiration of the lease term, as the principal counterclaim, and as the preliminary counterclaim, filed a claim for the purchase of a ground object and the delivery of land based on the exercise of the right to demand a ground object. The principal claim was partially accepted, and the principal counterclaim was partially dismissed, and the principal counterclaim claim was partly partly accepted. As such, the Plaintiff and the Defendant filed an appeal and an incidental appeal only

2. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the basic facts are as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is cited as it is by the main text of

3. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a new building owned by the Plaintiff at the Plaintiff’s expense and has registered the preservation of ownership in the name of the Defendant in accordance with the title trust agreement with the Defendant, and the foregoing title trust agreement and the change of real rights accordingly are null and void in accordance with the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’

The lease contract of this case is a land lease agreement aimed at owning the building of this case, and the defendant expressed his intention to refuse to renew the lease contract of this case to the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff shall exercise the right to purchase the ground object under Articles 643 and 283 of the Civil Act by serving a copy of the complaint of this case on the defendant.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 250,000,000, which is a part of the purchase price for the instant building, and damages for delay.

B. The registration of preservation of the building owner of the instant building and the building for which title trust agreement exists, based on the determination as to the cause of the claim, is not newly constructed by the nominal owner.