1. At the request of a change in exchange at the trial of the party, the Defendant to C (Seoul Gwangjin-gu I 201) shall:

(a) the annexed list;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 7, 2011, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into an exchange contract with C to enter into a real estate exchange contract with the content that: (a) the Plaintiff has the right to claim ownership transfer registration by entering into an ownership transfer contract with C; (b) the real estate listed in the attached Table where the ownership transfer registration is completed in C’s name (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s exchange”) and (c) Sii-si, Sii-si, G where the ownership transfer registration was completed in F’s name (hereinafter “Defendant’s exchange goods”) and H 6,545 square meters of the 6,545 square meters of the Ha-gun, New-gun, Seoul

(hereinafter referred to as "the instant exchange contract"). (b)

In accordance with the instant exchange contract by the Defendant’s nonperformance, the Defendant performed only the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer concerning the forest land located in the said new-gun, despite having been subject to the procedures for the registration of ownership transfer from C on November 17, 201, but did not implement the procedures for the registration of ownership transfer concerning the goods exchanged by the Defendant, and operated the franchise in the Plaintiff’s exchange goods.

C. On August 28, 2013, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the cancellation of the instant exchange contract on the ground that he/she did not perform his/her duty to transfer the ownership of the goods exchanged by the Defendant, which was delivered to the Defendant on August 30, 2013, and thereafter, the copy of the instant written complaint sent to the Defendant on September 30, 2013, including the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to cancel the instant exchange contract.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the instant exchange contract was lawfully rescinded by the Plaintiff’s declaration of intention of cancellation as of September 16, 2013, on the ground of the Defendant’s failure to perform the duty to transfer ownership of the goods exchanged, and thus, the Plaintiff’s cancellation against the Defendant in subrogation of C.