2. Lawsuit A by the plaintiff (appointed party)

A. On June 12, 2008, the Defendant was authorized to implement the said Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project (hereinafter “instant Improvement Project”) by the head of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the head of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as the Housing Redevelopment Development and Improvement Project Association whose project district covers 58,350 square meters in Seongdong-gu, Seoul.

B. The Plaintiff (Appointed Party) A (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff A”) and the Plaintiff and the Appointor D together with the Plaintiff were members of the Defendant, who owned the building of F-69 square meters in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and G-13 square meters and its ground located within the instant improvement project zone (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “first real estate”), and the Appointor D owned the building of H large scale 73 square meters and its ground (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “second real estate”).

C. The defendant from June 19, 2008 to its members, including the plaintiffs, on June 23, 2008, the same year

7. By December 22, 200, the period of application was set as the period of application, and the Plaintiffs applied for the sale of housing to the Defendant within the said period.

On March 11, 2011, the management and disposal plan was approved and publicly announced pursuant to Article 49 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents.

E. On August 5, 2011, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Appointor D seeking delivery of the instant second real estate as Seoul Eastern District Court 201Kadan509444.

On December 14, 2011, when the lawsuit was pending, the Appointor D notified the Defendant to withdraw the application for parcelling-out, but on April 2, 2012, the judgment ordering the Appointor D to transfer the instant 2 real estate to the Appointor D on the ground that the Appointor D cannot be deemed the subject of cash liquidation, was sentenced, and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

Accordingly, around May 2012, the Appointor D delivered the instant real estate No. 2 to the Defendant.

F. In addition, on December 19, 2011, the Defendant brought an action against the Plaintiff A seeking delivery of the instant real estate No. 1 by Seoul Eastern District Court 201Gadan81986.