The plaintiff is a corporation established under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents for the purpose of improving the urban and residential environment by constructing new buildings in Seongdong-gu Seoul, Seongdong-gu, and contributing to the improvement of the residential stability and the quality of residential life of its members, and C is a person who worked as a director after the registration of incorporation was completed on June 2007, and the defendant is a person who purchased each real estate listed in the separate sheet

C’s tort C was convicted on February 3, 2015 of imprisonment with prison labor for not more than five years, fines of not more than nine hundred million won, and 210 million won, including the following facts in the case of F, G, H, and I working as an executive of the Plaintiff in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Consolidation), including the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2014Gohap206, 211 (combined), 233 (Consolidated), and 374 (Joint Trust).

As the executives of the plaintiff, the defendants had a duty to properly manage the redevelopment improvement project, such as ordering appropriate construction services related to the redevelopment project and paying service costs according to the nature and nature.

Nevertheless, the Defendants concluded the following service contracts without closely examining the necessity of concluding the relevant service contracts, the appropriateness of the service cost and the timing for payment, etc., and paid all or part of the payments in accordance with the following service contracts:

On September 4, 2009, the Defendants ordered services worth KRW 5,497,50,000 in total, including entering into a contract for flood prevention and removal services on six occasions from July 6, 2010 to October 28, 2013 in the form of a negotiated contract for construction for dismantling asbestos slate, etc. and ② the legal services related to land expropriation ruling.

However, it is true that it dismantles designated wastes such as asbestos.