소유권이전등기 등 청구의 소
1. Defendant B received KRW 1,960,714,820 from the Plaintiff at the same time, and simultaneously received from the Plaintiff:
(a) Attached Forms 1 and 2.
Basic Facts
The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or are recognized by Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3-7, 8, 12, and Gap evidence Nos. 4, and the overall purport of the pleadings as a result of the appraiser D's appraisal.
The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and improvement project partnership that obtained authorization from the head of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on April 25, 2016 pursuant to the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (wholly amended by Act No. 14576, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter “former Act”) to promote a reconstruction project in the area of 27,460 square meters of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.
Defendant B is the owner of each real estate listed in attached Tables 1 and 2 within the said project implementation zone, and Defendant C is the owner of the real estate listed in attached Table 3.
The Plaintiff to Defendant B on June 16, 2016, June 27, 2016, and the same year
7.8. The title "Peremptory Notice on Rebuilding participation" refers to a reply to whether to participate in the reconstruction project within two months from the date of receipt of the above Peremptory Notice, and each reply is sent within two months, which contains the purport to exercise the right to demand sale under Article 39 of the former Act, and the same year.
9.6. On September 30, 2016, a notice for rebuilding participation that contains the extension of the reply deadline by September 30, 2016 was sent, but each of the above notice and notice were returned to the Plaintiff.
The Plaintiff also to Defendant C on June 16, 2016, and the same year
7.8. Each of the above written peremptory notices shall be sent, and the same shall apply
9.6. The above notice for rebuilding participation was sent, but all the above notice and notice were returned to the Plaintiff.
The Plaintiff notified the Defendants of whether they agreed to establish an association through the service of the duplicate of the complaint in this case and expressed their intent to request sale. The duplicate of the complaint in this case was served on October 26, 2016 on Defendant B, and on January 30, 2017 on Defendant C.
The defendants are the defendants.