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

A. Under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the establishment of a housing reconstruction project (hereinafter “instant project”) on June 12, 2003 from the head of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government pursuant to Article 28 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, and obtained authorization for the implementation of a project on December 26, 2013 from the head of Songpa-gu under Articles 48 and 49(2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), and the head of Songpa-gu publicly notified the instant management and disposal plan pursuant to Article 49(3) of the Act on January 29, 2015.

B. The Defendant is the Plaintiff’s member as the owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet included in the instant project site (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

C. According to the Plaintiff’s articles of incorporation, “members shall leave the relevant house within the resettlement period determined and notified by the Plaintiff (Article 32(4)), and members of the association shall be liable to compensate for all damages incurred therefrom and shall not raise an objection to the Plaintiff (Article 32(5)).”

On June 18, 2014, the Plaintiff publicly announced that the period from July 7, 2014 to August 8, 2014, the Plaintiff requested the relocation, etc. of commercial union members. The Defendant, who is a member of a commercial building, did not withdraw from each of the instant real estate during the period of relocation.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the delivery of the instant real estate, but withdrawn the lawsuit when the said Defendant completed the delivery of the said real estate on April 2015.

(e).