1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 60,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from September 16, 2015 to the day of complete payment.

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by adding up the whole purport of the pleadings to the entries in Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 5, Gap evidence 6, Gap evidence 7, and Gap evidence 8:

On October 20, 2005, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract with the Defendant, who represented the CD, to distribute 6616 square meters (2,000 square meters) to 300 million won out of 13,008 square meters in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and concluded a sales contract to distribute 616 square meters (2,00 square meters) to 300 million won. As a special agreement, the Plaintiff determined that “1. The method of the transfer of name shall be a provisional disposition, and if the transfer of name is made, 2,000 square meters (6,616 square meters) from F shall be transferred to the name.”

B. On December 13, 2005, F forest land of 15,094㎡, which is owned by G, was partitioned along with the registration conversion, and became a 6,611 square meters of H forest land in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do (hereinafter “instant forest”) (hereinafter “instant forest”).

After that, on January 1, 2012, due to the change of the name of the administrative district, H forest was 6,611 square meters.

C. The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff on the ground of sale as of March 25, 2007, No. 24563, which was received on April 29, 2005, by acquiring the forest land of this case in accordance with the terms and conditions of the above sales contract, by means of the registration of intermediate omission.

On March 20, 2006, the Plaintiff issued the order of provisional disposition prohibiting the disposal of the preserved right as the right to claim ownership transfer registration on March 21, 2006 and completed the registration of provisional disposition on March 21, 2006.

On July 10, 2006, the Plaintiff paid KRW 60 million to the Defendant under the name of development expenses when requesting the ordinary work of the instant forest (hereinafter “instant ordinary work contract”).

2. Determination:

A. We examine the determination on the cause of the claim, and the fact that the Plaintiff paid 60 million won to the Defendant as the development cost of the forest of this case is as set out in the above basic facts. The Defendant did not start the development of the forest of this case until the date of closing argument in this case.