1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant is the plaintiff from among the plaintiffs stated in the attached Table 1's list.

1. Process of conversion for sale in lots;

A. On June 25, 2001, the Defendant obtained the approval of the housing construction project plan from the original housing market, and constructed the AB 4 and 460 households on the AB 4 and 460 households on the land of the National Housing Fund with the funding of the National Housing Fund. On March 5, 2005, the occupancy date was set as July of the same year and announced the invitation of occupants.

The Plaintiffs and the Defendant entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant lease agreement”) with respect to each of the relevant households indicated in the “Indication of the real estate” column in attached Form 3 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant rental housing”). Each lease deposit shall be as indicated in the “Guarantee Amount” column in attached Form 3.

B. On June 30, 2010, the Defendant did not file an application for approval for conversion for sale in lots for at least six months after the lapse of five years, which is the mandatory rental period for the instant rental housing, the Plaintiffs organized a council of lessees’ representatives. On November 19, 201, the Plaintiffs requested the designation of an appraisal agency for calculating conversion price for sale in lots with the original Mayor. Based on the appraisal results of the Korea Appraisal Board and the Appraisal Board, which is an appraisal agency selected by the original mayor, applied for approval for conversion for sale in lots of rental housing with the original Mayor on March 22, 2012.

Therefore, the original state Mayor approved the conversion price for sale on May 4, 2012, and the conversion price for sale by the Plaintiff of the instant rental housing is as stated in the “sale conversion price” column in attached Table 3.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 1, Gap's evidence 4 through 13 (hereinafter referred to as "a separate statement") and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On May 4, 2012, according to the application of the council of lessees' representatives for approval of conversion of rental housing in this case, the original state of the plaintiffs' assertion approved conversion for sale in lots, and the defendant did not comply with conversion for sale in lots for at least six months thereafter.

Accordingly, the lessee of the instant rental house is subject to preferential conversion for sale in lots.