The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. Where the association is dissolved due to the achievement of its purpose, etc. as to the ground of appeal No. 1, and only there remain remaining remaining remaining remaining assets of the association to be treated separately, each member may, without undergoing separate liquidation procedures, claim for the distribution of residual assets to the members who own residual assets in excess of the distribution ratio of their residual assets within the scope of their distribution ratio.

However, if the administrative affairs, such as collection of claims, repayment of obligations, etc. which have been reverted to a union jointly and severally, are not completed, the collection of claims or repayment of obligations should be jointly performed by all partners. Thus, barring any special circumstance, it is not possible to seek distribution of residual assets without undergoing the liquidation procedures.

(Supreme Court Decision 201Da47084, 47091 Decided October 11, 2013). The lower court determined that the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff)’s assertion seeking the distribution of residual assets cannot be accepted on the ground that, in addition to the distribution of residual assets among the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff), the liquidation procedures were not completed, such as the collection of claims and the repayment of debts, etc., in addition to the distribution of residual assets between the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Plaintiff) related to the land D in Chang-si and the aggregate building on its ground

In light of the above legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misunderstanding facts against logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal principles on the distribution of the residual property of the association, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the principle of pleading, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, in so determining, that the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) have asserted that they lent money to an association that is a member.

3. Therefore, all appeals are to be filed.