1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

Defendants and D’s related Defendants are the wife of D’s father, and Defendant C are the wife of D’s father.

On October 23, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into an exchange contract between the Plaintiff and D with respect to the E forest land of 430 square meters (referring to the administrative district and land category change to F. 430 square meters at the time of harmony; hereinafter “instant land”) owned by D as Defendant B on October 23, 2013, the purchase price of which shall be KRW 226,000,000, and the down payment shall be KRW 20,000,000 on the day, and the remainder shall be paid on February 28, 2014, and the Plaintiff entered into a contract to exchange the G land and the land building (hereinafter “G real estate exchange contract”).

On December 20, 2013, the Plaintiff of the construction contract between the Plaintiff and D obtained permission for development of the instant land.

D On January 8, 2014, the Plaintiff and the New Housing Construction Corporation on the instant land (hereinafter “instant construction”) entered into a contract for construction works with the purport that construction cost of KRW 182,00,000 (excluding value-added tax) and the construction period from January 8, 2014 to March 30, 2014, the construction contract was to be executed upon entrustment by the Plaintiff.

D around March 2014, around 2014, completed the instant house of 52 square meters in total (hereinafter referred to as “instant house”).

The Plaintiff paid KRW 176,700,000 to D as the construction cost, and on March 24, 2014, the Plaintiff occupied the instant housing upon delivery, but did not obtain the approval of completion of the instant housing until then.

On April 25, 2014, the friendliness market between the Plaintiff and D did not grant approval for completion even after it pointed out the Plaintiff’s prior occupancy prior to completion and issued a corrective order.

D The reason why the Plaintiff did not complete construction is that the name of the owner of the instant land and the owner who received permission for development activities is different. Accordingly, the Plaintiff is permitted to engage in development activities D around July 2014.