1. The Plaintiff pursuant to the sales contract on May 29, 2008 with respect to five square meters among the 617 square meters in Northern-gu, Northern-gu, Mapo-gu, Mapo-si, Mapo-si, Mapo-si

1. Basic facts

A. On May 23, 2008, the Plaintiff is an owner of 617 square meters in Northern-gu, Northern-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, and owned two-story detached houses of reinforced concrete structure (a building area of 123.02 square meters and building-to-land ratio of 19.94%; hereinafter “instant housing”) on the said ground.

B. On May 29, 2008, the Plaintiff: (a) on May 29, 2008, sold to the Defendant approximately five (five (five (five (5) square meters adjacent to the land and D at the time of the above sale and purchase agreement on the road between the land and D), the land category was changed to “the building site”; (b) on October 9, 2008, the land category was changed to “the building site”; hereinafter “instant land”) at five million won; and (c) agreed as follows:

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). The part outside the retaining wall of the sold real estate shall be exercised by the Defendant.

When circumstances change like land category change, the plaintiff shall at any time make the registration of transfer of ownership to the defendant for the real estate at any time.

When the plaintiff succeeds to or sells the above land to a third party, he/she shall notify the third party and the defendant of the deduction of the portion of the land in this case.

In the event that the ownership transfer is unreasonable between the plaintiff and the plaintiff due to the conflict with the Building Act or all the laws regarding the land of this case, the seller shall return 5 million won to the buyer, and the sales contract of this case is terminated.

(hereinafter “instant special agreement”). C.

The Defendant paid KRW 5 million to the Plaintiff according to the instant sales contract.

The Plaintiff came to know against the Defendant that the instant housing was in violation of the Building Act because the building-to-land ratio exceeds 20% permitted if the instant land was transferred to the Defendant. Therefore, according to the instant special agreement, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit stating that the sales contract was rescinded, and the Plaintiff’s obligation to implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer was nonexistent.” The duplicate of the complaint is the same.