1. The defendant shall receive KRW 90,000,000 from the plaintiff and at the same time real estate stated in the attached Table from the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the Housing Reconstruction Project Association established to implement the Housing Reconstruction Improvement Project in Seongbuk-gu, Changwon-si. The Defendant is the owner of the real estate indicated in the separate sheet located within the said Improvement Project Zone (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On June 14, 2013, the Plaintiff sent a written peremptory notice to the Defendant within two months as to whether the Plaintiff consented to the establishment of the Plaintiff’s association by content-certified mail. However, the Defendant did not reply within two months after receiving the written peremptory notice.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff exercised the right to claim the sale of the instant real estate owned by the Defendant by serving a duplicate of the instant complaint on the Defendant, and the duplicate was served on the Defendant on December 18, 2014.

C. Meanwhile, as of July 8, 2015, the market price of the instant real estate is KRW 90,000,000.

[Ground of recognition] without any dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-10, Gap evidence 3, 4, Gap evidence 5-10, Gap evidence 6-8, appraiser D's appraisal result and whole purport of pleading

2. According to Article 39 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents and Article 48(1) through (4) of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings, a housing reconstruction and improvement project association shall urge a person who does not consent to the establishment of the association to reply in writing as to whether he/she will participate in the reconstruction, and if he/she does not reply within two months, he/she may request a sale by deeming that he/she would not participate in the reconstruction.

As seen earlier, the fact that the Plaintiff exercised the right to demand sale by serving a copy of the complaint of this case via the peremptory notice to the Defendant is deemed to have responded that the Defendant does not consent to the establishment of an association by failing to reply within two months from the date on which the Plaintiff received the peremptory notice from the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Plaintiff and the Defendant are deemed to be the same.