1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant was established for the reconstruction project of the “B” shopping complex on the Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant reconstruction project”). On July 29, 2010, the Defendant finally passed a resolution on the amendment of the management and disposal plan (hereinafter “instant general assembly”) through the management and disposal plan general assembly (hereinafter “instant general assembly”). At that time, the competent Seo-gu Incheon National Office revised the management and disposal plan.

B. On March 22, 2010, the Defendant agreed to guarantee KRW 105,52,305 of the contributions to D, unless there is any change in the design between D and D members of the Defendant, who owned B Nos. 1 and 2 No. 1 and 8 of the second floor prior to the instant general assembly (hereinafter “instant implementation agreement”).

However, despite the above agreement, the contribution to D at the general meeting of this case was decided to be KRW 162,667,796.

C. Meanwhile, E, which had been owned by the Defendant Nos. 20 of the B 1st floor, was sold in lots in KRW 484,592,00 according to the instant reconstruction project on July 30, 2010, the following day of the instant general meeting.

In addition, D also purchased No. 107 on July 30, 2010 according to the instant reconstruction project (hereinafter “instant No. 2 shopping district”). Unlike the contents of the instant agreement at the time of the instant agreement for the sale of commercial buildings, D also paid KRW 105,552,00 in installments based on the amount under the instant implementation agreement.

On November 15, 2010, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract from E to purchase KRW 363,859,200, and KRW 604,00,00, the second purchase price of the instant case from D on August 26, 201.

On December 30, 2010, the Defendant, the seller of the instant commercial building, signed and sealed the seller’s confirmation column in the first sale contract of this case with the purport that the Plaintiff consented to the Plaintiff’s succession to all rights and obligations under the said sale contract of this case. On October 21, 201, the Plaintiff was D.