1.(a)

Defendant B, C, D, E, F, G, K, L, M, N, P, Q, R, and S are described respectively in the “sale price” column in attached Table 1 from the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 27, 2003, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the establishment of a reconstruction housing association from the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on May 27, 2003 to implement a housing reconstruction project on the ground of 48,775 square meters in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and completed the establishment registration on July 30, 2003. Afterward designation of the W urban renewal acceleration district, and the rearrangement zone in accordance with the determination of the urban renewal acceleration plan was changed to the 65,148 square meters in Mapo-gu X-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”), the Plaintiff completed the establishment registration after obtaining authorization for the establishment registration from the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on June 26, 2012 after undergoing the procedures for consent for establishment.

B. The Defendants are only owners of a building, such as the entry in the attached Table 1 “real estate” column in the Plaintiff’s project implementation district.

C. On December 20, 2012, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendants on December 20, 2012, with the notice of reply as to whether the Plaintiff consented to the establishment of the association by the delivery of a duplicate of the instant complaint, and at the same time, the Defendant did not consent to the establishment of the association within two months from the date of delivery of a duplicate of the complaint of this case, pursuant to Article 39 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) and Article 48 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings”), to exercise the right to demand sale according to the appraisal price. The instant lawsuit

On the date two months elapse from the date of delivery of a copy of each complaint to the Defendants, the “the date of sale” in the attached Table 1 sheet is identical to the corresponding date as stated in the corresponding date. The market price of each of the pertinent real estate as of the above date is as stated in the attached Table 1 sheet with respect to B, C, D, E, F, G,K, L, M, N,O, P, Q, R, and S. The market price is as stated in the attached Table 1 sheet with respect to the remaining Defendants.

E. Meanwhile, Defendant B, C, J, K, L, M, and N respectively.