1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall recover the title of the real estate stated in the separate sheet from the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around October 2004, the Defendant decided to construct and operate temples and charnel houses on the ground (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) on the ground of C, Seoyeong-si D, and E (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”).

B. C on January 6, 2005, ordered F to F on the ground of each of the instant lands the construction work for construction of temples, refectiones, charnel houses, theaters, and houses at KRW 1,000,000,000.

(hereinafter “instant construction project”). C and the Defendant were unable to pay the construction cost to F, and the instant construction project was suspended due to the change of construction business operator G, and another construction project was discontinued for the same reason that the construction business operator continued to engage in the construction project. The Plaintiff was awarded the instant construction contract.

C. On August 2, 2006, the Defendant and C agreed to the Plaintiff on August 2, 2006, to change the name of the building permit, such as each of the instant land and the inspection to be newly constructed, from C to the Plaintiff for the purpose of receiving the loan and paying the construction cost.

On January 2007, the Plaintiff completed the new construction of temples and charnel houses on each land of this case.

On February 6, 2007, the Plaintiff completed the registration of initial ownership on each of the buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant inspection, etc.”) newly constructed on each of the instant land as the receipt of the Taegu District Court Decision No. 1864 on February 6, 2007.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of the principal claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff did not receive the construction cost under the instant construction contract from the Defendant. In other words, the Plaintiff received only KRW 94,15,00 from the Defendant among KRW 428,583,356 of the instant construction cost and KRW 50,00,000 of the final civil construction cost (= KRW 428,583,356 of the instant construction cost) and KRW 50,356 of the final civil construction cost (= KRW 428,583,356 of the KRW 50,000 of the instant construction cost).

Therefore, the Defendant, in the construction cost of this case, excluded the repair cost of KRW 82,759,823 and the fixed payment cost of KRW 301,68.