1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Defendant is an incorporated association established on January 9, 2001 for the purpose of the business of creating Buddhist music and singing music, music education, and publishing in order to promote the improvement and development of Buddhist music. The Plaintiff was the chief director at the time of the establishment of the Defendant, and C’s well-known information located in each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”).

On March 15, 200, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with D Association to donate each of the real estate of this case and each of the land and the land and the building on the ground of Jongno-gu Seoul, Seoul as the fundamental property at the time of its establishment (hereinafter “instant donation contract”) and entered into a certificate of contribution. The main contents are as follows.

The real estate of this case and the land and building of Jongno-gu Seoul E are the Plaintiff’s ownership, and the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Defendant was completed on February 2, 2001, which was established on January 9, 2001 after the Defendant’s signature and seal affixed thereon for the following days in order to prove that the real estate of this case and the land and building of this case should be contributed as basic property at the time of the registration of the D Association (Defendant) as an incorporated association of D Association.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 3, 11 evidence (including each number, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul 21 evidence, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. The gift contract of this case was used in line with the purpose of the establishment of the defendant, and was made on the condition that the plaintiff maintained the defendant's president position until the plaintiff died, and was based on the condition that each of the real estate of this case. The defendant did not comply with the above condition, and thus, the contract of this case was cancelled.

B. Since the Plaintiff has no active property and has difficulties in maintaining livelihood, the donor’s property status is significant after the donation contract under Articles 557 and 557 of the Civil Act (Change of donor’s property status and cancellation of donation).