1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 5, 2007, the Defendant entered into an agency contract with C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) on the implementation of the project of the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government District Housing Association (hereinafter “instant implementation agency contract”), and delegated C the authority on the purchase of the relevant land, authorization and permission, management of contributions, recruitment of union members (resident and general sale).

B. C, on September 3, 2007, purchased land and buildings within the said project district from the Egypt Association (hereinafter “Egypt Association”), and agreed to supply one copy of the apartment purchase right owned by C when joining the association, separate from the purchase price.

C. On March 24, 2008, the Plaintiff: (a) decided to acquire the sales right (the Defendant’s association’s exclusive use area of 85 square meters or less; hereinafter “instant sales right”) to receive from C from E; and (b) paid KRW 43 million to Ehy Association; and (c) on the same day, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with C that represented the Defendant to purchase the instant sales right as an object of the instant sales right; and (d) paid part of the share of the Plaintiff’s share of KRW 561,240,00 (hereinafter “instant agreement to join the association”); and (e) paid KRW 69,624,00 among the share of the Plaintiff’s members (the share of KRW 00).

On April 21, 2010, the Defendant notified C of the termination of the instant vicarious execution contract.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant contract was terminated by the Defendant, thereby making it impossible for C to transfer the instant right to sell the instant land to E Educational Association, and the E Educational Association was unable to transfer the right to sell the instant land to the Plaintiff. As such, the instant contract was impossible to perform due to the Defendant’s responsibility.

In addition, the defendant unilaterally refused the execution concerning the contract of joining the association of this case.

Therefore, the contract to join the association of this case is cancelled by the plaintiff.