1. The plaintiffs' primary part of the lawsuit of this case and the approval of completion of the conjunctive claim.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 19, 2003, the defendant union was established for the purpose of implementing a housing redevelopment project at the Busan Metropolitan City Friwon, which was designated by the head of the Busan Metropolitan City Mayor as the housing redevelopment zone. On December 19, 2005, the establishment of the project plan was approved by the head of the defendant on September 7, 2007. On September 13, 2007, the defendant union received the application for parcelling-out from September 14, 2007 to October 14, 2007 through the guidance for the application for parcelling-out from the same date, and obtained the approval of the management and disposal plan on March 14, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the "management and disposal plan in this case"), after obtaining the approval of the management and disposal plan on March 14, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the "approval of the management and disposal plan in this case"), after the general meeting on April 11, 201 (hereinafter referred to as the "approval of the above management and disposal plan in this case").

(hereinafter referred to as “instant authorization for completion”). (b)

1) The plaintiffs owned land and buildings within the above project zone but became eligible for cash settlement because they failed to file an application for parcelling-out within the above project zone. The plaintiffs and the defendant association did not reach an agreement on compensation, and they deposited compensation according to the results of the adjudication of expropriation by the local land expropriation committee of Busan Metropolitan City and the adjudication of the Central Land Expropriation Committee, and received each of the plaintiffs. (2) On July 7, 2008, the plaintiff Eul filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the management and disposal plan against the defendant association under the Busan District Court Decision 2008Guhap2935 on the ground that the cash settlement appraised on the real estate owned by the defendant association was remarkably low compared to neighboring land, but the above judgment was finalized as the withdrawal of the plaintiff Eul's appeal.

3 Plaintiff D.