1. The Daegu High Court Decision 2009Na3051 decided May 28, 2010 against the plaintiff of the defendant B Housing Reconstruction Project Cooperatives.

1. The fact of recognition / [1] The Plaintiff is the owner of the Daegu Jung-gu Seoul Central District 50 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) and the owner of the 13th floor of the 1st floor of the 13th floor of the building (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) on the ground.

Defendant B Housing Reconstruction and Improvement Project Association (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Association”) is a housing reconstruction and improvement project association established for the reconstruction of new apartment houses after demolishing an old building built on a lot of 16,608 square meters outside Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, and 108 square meters of land pursuant to the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (amended by Act No. 8785 of Dec. 21, 2007, hereinafter referred to as the “former Urban Improvement Act”). The approval was obtained from the head of the Gu on April 6, 2006 from the Daegu Metropolitan City.

The defendant Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant Corporation") is a public corporation that performs guarantee business, etc. to support the promotion of housing welfare and urban regeneration revitalization.

[2] The defendant union exercised the right to demand sale under the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter "the Aggregate Buildings Act") on July 7, 2006 against 27 persons including the plaintiff, etc. who did not participate in the reconstruction project, as the Daegu District Court case No. 2006Gahap1084, and on May 28, 2010 from the Daegu High Court case No. 2009Na3051 (hereinafter "the judgment of this case"), the appellate court, at the same time, the plaintiff received 156,140,000 won from the defendant union and at the same time the defendant union received 156,140,000 won from the defendant union as to the land and buildings of this case, and delivered the land of this case and buildings of this case to the defendant union on July 14, 2006.

Defendant Union was issued an administrative disposition plan on July 10, 2015.

[3] Meanwhile, even after the judgment became final and conclusive, the Plaintiff did not pay the purchase price to the Defendant Partnership on July 12, 2010.