1. Defendant C, D, and the Korean Licensed Real Estate Agent Association jointly with the Plaintiff KRW 26,070,000 and KRW 12,408,00 of the said money.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 27, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant A, a licensed real estate agent, to purchase KRW 1,280,000 for the purchase of KRW 3,974 square meters in Busan-gun E-gun, Busan-gun (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by Defendant A for the purpose of constructing a logistics warehouse on the ground (the first contract is to pay KRW 1,180,000 for the down payment at the time of the first contract; KRW 1,180,000 for the remainder on April 26, 2013; KRW 1,000 for the remainder payment at the time of the contract; KRW 250,000 for the intermediate payment on April 10, 2013; KRW 1,000 for the intermediate payment at the time of the contract; KRW 300,000 for the intermediate payment on April 15, 2013; hereinafter the same shall apply).

Where the purchaser of the special agreement fails to obtain a qualification certificate for acquisition of farmland before the date of the remainder and the logistics warehouse permission is not granted on the object, this contract shall become null and void.

A seller shall immediately refund the already received amount.

Administrative defects are responsible for real estate.

All the matters of authorization and permission shall be borne by the buyer, and the seller shall actively cooperate with them.

B. On May 13, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for a building permit deemed as permission to divert farmland and permission to engage in development activities with the office of the captain of Busan Metropolitan City on the instant land. However, on July 5, 2013, the Plaintiff was issued a disposition of denying an application for a building permit on the ground that the Plaintiff was not in compliance with the standards for permission to engage in development activities as an area designated as a pilot project zone being promoted by Busan Metropolitan City. The Plaintiff was dismissed on the ground that the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal and administrative litigation, but there was no abuse of discretion by an administrative agency, and the disposition became final and conclusive.