1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is a regional housing association established for the purpose of constructing and supplying an apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) at the Dongwon in Kimhae-si, Kimhae-si (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. On May 8, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement to enter into an association with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant agreement”) and paid each of the Defendant KRW 65,920,000,00 as the down payment under the instant agreement, as the down payment, on April 18, 2015, pursuant to the instant agreement, KRW 15,810,00 on May 15, 2015, KRW 25,810,000 on April 29, 2016, and KRW 14,30,000 on May 7, 2016, respectively.

C. The main contents of the instant contract are as shown in the attached Table 1 joining agreement, and the contents of the Defendant Association’s bylaws are as listed in the attached Table 2.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the assertion of cancellation or termination of a contract

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the contract of this case is cancelled or terminated by delivering a copy of the complaint of this case on the grounds of cancellation or termination as follows. Thus, the defendant must return the money paid by the plaintiff to the plaintiff with the restoration to original state.

1) Persons related to unions, including the former president, etc. of the Defendant (hereinafter “persons related to unions”)

(2) The contract of this case is currently impossible because it is substantially difficult to achieve the purpose of the project of this case and the contract of this case due to the improper execution of the project costs, embezzlement, and breach of trust, etc. of this case. In light of the above circumstances, the contract of this case is currently impossible. Furthermore, the defendant is responsible for the above situation that resulted in the nonperformance of the contract of this case. 2) The circumstances such as the above paragraph 1 are significant changes in circumstances that the plaintiff could not have anticipated at the time of entering into the contract of this case, and maintaining the contract of this case is obviously contrary to the good faith principle.