1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant C re-paragraph 4 of the attached list.

1. The facts in the attached Form of the judgment on the plaintiff's cause of claim do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the whole purport of the pleadings in each of the evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including the paper numbers). Therefore, the defendants are obligated to deliver to the plaintiff each real estate owned and occupied within the business territory of the plaintiff's association.

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. The Defendants asserted that the appraisal of the Plaintiff’s real estate owned by the Defendants is unfair due to its substantial decline in the market price, and that there is an administrative litigation (Seoul Administrative Court 2016Guhap61327) seeking dissolution of the Plaintiff Union, and thus, they cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim. However, the above circumstance alone is insufficient to reject the Plaintiff’s claim.

B. In addition, Defendant C alleged that it was impossible to comply with the Plaintiff’s claim after filing an application for parcelling-out and withdrawing it after becoming the Plaintiff’s member, and that the cash clearing agent cannot comply with the Plaintiff’s claim after receiving the full amount of compensation after the acceptance decision. However, the issue of cash clearing for the Plaintiff requires a resolution at the general meeting of the Plaintiff Union as required. The evidence submitted by Defendant C alone is insufficient to recognize that there was a resolution at the general meeting of the contents of the above Defendant’s assertion. The above assertion by

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.