The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal.

1. The defendant's appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance is not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance except where the court emphasizes or adds the following arguments. The defendant's appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance is justified even if the evidence submitted by the court of first instance in the court of first instance was delivered with the evidence presented by this court.

Therefore, the reasoning for the reasoning of the instant judgment is as follows: (a) the construction office “a building office” in the 6th page of the judgment of the first instance is used as “a building office”; and (b) the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant emphasizes or adds to this court is identical to the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition of the following “2. Additional Judgment”, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The defendant's assertion that the plaintiff did not obtain the housing construction project approval because it failed to secure the site of the project as at the expiration of five years after concluding the contract with the defendant for joining the association of this case, and the contract is in an impossible situation, and it is not a household.

Even if the supply of housing was delayed due to disputes with partners, contractors, and agencies for several years, so the obligation of the Plaintiff under the above contract was omitted due to the delay in performance. Thus, the Defendant cancelled the above contract due to the impossibility or delay in performance of the Plaintiff.

B. On January 2018, F and G, the owner of the land E in the instant project site, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, the owner of the instant land, would cancel the sales contract of the said land due to the remainder payment to D Co., Ltd. around January 2018.

The facts are as seen earlier, and according to the evidence evidence No. 4, if the Kimpo-market requested the plaintiff on October 19, 2020 to submit the data on the progress of the instant project and the future promotion plan promoted by the plaintiff on October 30, 2020, and if the plan for the promotion of the project is insufficient as a result of the submission or review of the above data, it is above through the hearing procedure in accordance with Article 96 of the Housing Act.