2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. On January 21, 2008, the Defendant is the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association which was authorized by the head of the Busan Metropolitan City office on January 21, 2008 for the purpose of implementing the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project at the Busan Seo-gu Seoul Seo-gu, Busan, and according to the evidence No. 9-1 and 2, the lot number address of the portal site is indicated as the same Gu K, but the lot number address address of the above portal site is not based on an accurate survey, and according to the road name address guidance system of the Ministry of Public Administration and Security, the building located at K and related lot number D (hereinafter “instant building”) is located within the said project implementation district as an unauthorized building.

B. Article 9(1) of the Defendant’s articles of incorporation provides that “The members shall be the owners of the land or buildings within the project implementation district or the persons with superficies thereof,” and Article 9(2) provides that “The rights of ownership, superficies, etc. under the provisions of paragraph (1) refer to the rights prescribed by the Civil Act: Provided, That where a building is an unauthorized building as prescribed by the Ordinance of a City/Do, which is an existing unauthorized building as prescribed by the Act, and established by the Ordinance of a City/Do, recognizes it as its members, and Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Busan Metropolitan City Ordinance on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments (including an illegal building) provides that “The existing unauthorized building means an unauthorized building (including an illegal building) arising

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Eul Nos. 1, 2, and 9 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the parties’ assertion 1) The Plaintiff is the owner who purchased the instant building, which is an unauthorized building, from E around 1988, and is qualified for membership pursuant to the Defendant’s articles of incorporation. 2) Whether the Defendant Plaintiff purchased the instant building from E is unclear, and whether the building purchased by the Plaintiff is the instant building.