1. The plaintiff's claim that is changed in exchange in the trial is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On April 10, 1989, the Plaintiff purchased each share of 134/334 square meters among 334 square meters of the Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Site, and completed each registration of ownership transfer in his/her future.

B. On September 4, 2008, the land of this case was divided into approximately 114 square meters in Gangnam-gu, Seoul. On October 30, 2008, the Plaintiff completed the registration of co-owners’ share transfer on the land of this case on the ground of the co-owners’ share transfer on the land of this case on October 30, 2008, and around that time, the Plaintiff became a sole owner of the land of this case, and on December 11, 2008, the said land of this case was combined with 199 square meters

(A) The area of the above E-land became 313 square meters. (C)

From around 2006, the Plaintiff filed a civil petition demanding the Defendant to secure the access road, since the instant C site prior to the said merger has no access road.

On March 2, 2009, the Plaintiff submitted to the Defendant a report on the survey results related to the above civil petition, and on March 30, 2009, submitted a letter stating that “If there is an alteration (public road) of urban planning facilities (public road) by the Gangwon-gu Office on the size of 233 square meters of land B owned by the Defendant, the Plaintiff shall purchase it.”

E. Around July 2009, the Defendant established a “F Park Civil Petition Processing Plan” with the content of exchanging 26 square meters and 26 square meters among the E-owned land owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant land exchange”) among the F parks to be created on the land B owned by the Defendant to resolve the Plaintiff’s civil petition.

F. On July 28, 2009, the Defendant sent a civil petition reply to the Plaintiff stating that “When accepting a plan to partially exchange land B with the land E, a written consent shall be submitted, and the survey results shall also be submitted by requesting the submission of the original copy by requesting the current status with which the area subject to the land exchange can be determined, and the survey results shall also be determined.” On August 20, 2009, the Plaintiff submitted the cadastral status survey results and written consent to the Defendant.

G. On December 31, 2009, the Defendant issued a notice of modified determination on urban planning facilities (public vacant land) on December 31, 2009, and on February 24, 2010.