(a) the annexed list;

A. The Plaintiff is a reconstruction association established to implement a housing reconstruction project in Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, and the Defendant owned the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) located in the instant project zone, but did not consent to the said reconstruction project.

B. On January 10, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant and exercised the right to demand sale on the condition that the Plaintiff did not express his/her consent to the Plaintiff’s establishment of the association within two months from the date on which the duplicate of the complaint in this case was served pursuant to Article 39 of the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (wholly amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter “former Act”). The purport was stated, and the duplicate of the complaint reached the Defendant on January 18, 2017.

C. The Defendant presented a written reply to the effect that, if an adequate appraisal value including development gains is presented, it will deliver the instant real estate in exchange for the said money and implement the procedures for ownership transfer registration.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 10, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Where a rebuilding association established following the exercise of a sale claim filed a lawsuit seeking the implementation of the procedure for ownership transfer registration by exercising the right to demand sale against a person who does not consent to the establishment of the association, and attaching a reply letter to whether to participate in reconstruction to the copy of the complaint, as long as the union made a peremptory notice to the other party as to the right to demand sale through the delivery of a copy of the complaint attached with the peremptory notice, it can be deemed that the other party has the same effect as exercising the right to demand sale on the day following the expiration of the return period under the condition that the other party should not participate in the reconstruction project within the peremptory period.