The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and improvement project partnership that obtained authorization from the head of Seocho-gu on March 9, 2015 pursuant to the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (wholly amended by Act No. 14576, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter “former Act”) to promote housing reconstruction projects in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E (hereinafter “instant reconstruction project”).

Within the instant reconstruction project zone, the Defendants owned each pertinent real estate (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) indicated in the “subject real estate” column in the attached Table 2 list of real estate in the instant reconstruction project zone.

B. On May 14, 2015, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendants a written peremptory notice to the effect that whether to participate in the instant reconstruction project within two months, and each of the said written peremptory notice reached the Defendants around that time, but the Defendants did not reply to the said written peremptory notice within that period.

C. The Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to exercise the right to demand sale of each of the instant real estate by serving a duplicate of the instant complaint on the Defendants. The duplicate of the instant complaint was served on Defendant C and D on November 11, 2015, and on Defendant B on December 12, 2015.

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. If a project implementer who entered into a sales contract due to the exercise of a claim for sale exercises a claim for sale under the former Urban Improvement Act for a person who does not participate in a housing reconstruction project, the sales contract for the land or building of the person who does not participate in the housing reconstruction project is established at the same time as the declaration of intent to exercise the claim for sale is delivered, and at the same time the sales contract is established at the market price.