2. The defendant shall receive KRW 322,057,440 from the plaintiff at the same time.

A. On April 27, 2006, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the establishment of an association from the Daegu Suwon-gu, and completed the establishment registration on May 26, 2006, and obtained authorization for the establishment of an association on February 26, 2016.

B. The Plaintiff Union failed to file a lawsuit within the exclusion period after the said amendment was made, and thereafter requested new written consents from its members, and obtained the authorization of the final establishment of the association on August 7, 2017.

C. The Defendant is the owner of the real estate indicated in the attached list located in the Plaintiff’s above housing reconstruction project zone (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and consented at the time of the first establishment of the Plaintiff association, but did not consent to the process of changing the establishment of the Plaintiff association on August 7, 2017, and did not apply for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out (from July 11, 2018 to August 16, 2018).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of whole pleadings

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. Most of all, the defendant is a person who gives consent in the process of changing the establishment of the association, and the plaintiff union is entitled to exercise a legitimate right to demand sale.

Plaintiff

A union sent a written notice to the Defendant seeking a reply as to whether to participate in a reconstruction project, and two months have passed since the union exercised the right to demand sale as a copy of the complaint of this case, the contract was concluded on the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to take procedures for the registration of ownership transfer of the instant real estate and deliver the said real estate to the Plaintiff at the same time when the appraisal as of the date of the above sales contract is paid to the Plaintiff KRW 315,297,440.

B. Preliminaryly, the defendant did not apply for parcelling-out within the period of the application for parcelling-out even though he consented to the establishment of the partnership, following the expiration date of the application period for parcelling-out from the plaintiff.