1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff, No. 193, 2017, drafted by C on September 11, 2017 by the law firm C.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 6, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a construction contract with the purport that the Defendant newly built neighborhood living facilities and multi-household houses (hereinafter “instant condominium buildings”) on the land owned by the Plaintiff and that the Plaintiff shall pay the Defendant KRW 795,800,000 as construction price.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

The Plaintiff paid KRW 745,00,000 in total as construction cost by September 27, 2017.

C. Upon the Defendant’s request for the increase of construction price, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to KRW 250,000,000 for the remainder of construction price on November 6, 2017.

On November 9, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant set the amount of loans of KRW 250,00,000,000 as loans, set the due date on June 30, 2018, and, when the Plaintiff fails to perform his/her obligations, a notary public, which included an expression of intent to recognize compulsory execution against which no objection is raised even if compulsory execution is conducted immediately, prepares a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement of KRW 193, 2017.

(hereinafter “instant Notarial Deed”). D.

On December 8, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant: (a) paid 50,00,000 won of the fair construction price of KRW 250,00,000 in the instant authentic deed; and (b) confirmed that the remainder of the construction price as of December 8, 2017 is KRW 200,000. The remainder of the construction price is KRW 200,000,000. The remainder of the construction price shall be paid within ten (10) days from the date of the bank loan after completion inspection and ownership registration of the instant building. A authentic deed drawn up on November 9, 2017 shall be null and void as of December 8, 2017.

(hereinafter “instant agreement”). [The grounds for recognition] The entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. It is reasonable to see that the non-execution agreement on the cause of the claim is a claim contract under the private law in connection with the realization of the substantive claim, and the execution in violation of this agreement is an unlawful execution.