The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The purpose of Article 48 (4) of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings is to stipulate the period for exercising the right to demand sale in order to exercise the right to demand sale to the sectional owners who did not participate in the reconstruction within 2 months from the expiration date of the period stipulated in paragraph (2) of the same Article after the notice is given to whether the participants in the reconstruction or the designated purchaser participate in the reconstruction, and to exercise the right to demand sale is to enforce the establishment of sales contract on the sectional ownership right of the sectional owners who did not participate in the reconstruction by the majority of the participants as the right to demand sale. Thus, if the period for exercising the right to demand sale is not restricted, the other party to the right to demand sale may not be able to make a demand for sale at any time because he/she or the designated purchaser may make a demand for sale at a time the market price of the sectional ownership subject to the purchase is to protect the legitimate legal interests of the other party and to promptly determine the legal relations surrounding the reconstruction, and therefore, if the right to demand sale is not exercised within the period for exercising the right above.

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da11621, Jun. 27, 2000). After finding facts as indicated in its reasoning based on the employment evidence, the lower court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that the Plaintiff’s right to claim for sale became invalid due to the lapse of the period of exercise, based on the highest date on April 6, 2012.

The above determination by the court below is just in accordance with the above legal principles, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the period for exercising the right to demand sale.

Therefore, all appeals are filed.