1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B:

1.A building entered in the list:

B. Defendant C shall attached Form

2. A building entered in the list, c.

1. Facts of recognition;

(1) In order to implement a housing redevelopment project (hereinafter “instant redevelopment project”), the Plaintiff obtained authorization from the head of the Busan Metropolitan City Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan Government on April 28, 2006 from the head of the Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant redevelopment project”), and obtained approval for the implementation plan on May 12, 2010, and approval for the implementation plan on August 29, 2014, and obtained application for parcelling-out.

D. On July 20, 2015, the Plaintiff received an administrative disposition plan from the head of the Dong-dong, and the head of the Dong-dong Office notified the above administrative disposition plan on July 29, 2015.

【Defendant B. Defendant B’s attachment

1. Buildings indicated in the list, and Defendant C, the attached Form;

2. The buildings indicated in the list and the defendant D shall be as shown in the attached Form.

3. Each owner of a building indicated in the list. The above buildings are within the instant redevelopment project zone, but the Defendants did not apply for parcelling-out.

x. On February 20, 2017, the Busan Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee decided to expropriate each building listed in the separate sheet on May 4, 2017, the date of expropriation. On April 17, 2017, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 465,535,460 to Defendant B, and KRW 617,824,690 to Defendant C on March 16, 2017, respectively, and paid KRW 157,797,110 to Defendant D on April 17, 2017 as compensation for consultation.

[Ground of recognition] As to Defendant B and C: Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3-1, 2, and 4 of Evidence Nos. 1, 3-2, and 4 of the whole pleadings, as to Defendant D: Judgment by deeming confession (Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. The Defendants, which judged on the prior defenses of Defendant B and C, were elected as the president of the Plaintiff’s association and were reappointed after the expiration of their terms of office, but thereafter, did not obtain authorization from the head of the Gu for the change of the establishment of the association, and there was no qualification to represent the Plaintiff by misrepresenting the false academic background in the election of the president of the association. Therefore, the instant lawsuit is brought by a person without the power of representation.