1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the appointed parties.

1. Basic facts: (a) The Defendant is an association established on June 30, 2003 with the aim of implementing a reconstruction project (hereinafter “instant project”) as its members with the owners of Ulsan-gu B Apartments as of Jun. 30, 2003; and (b) on June 16, 2005, with the authorization of the implementation of reconstruction projects from the south-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

② The Plaintiff owned the said apartment Nos. 19-dong 402, 19-dong 402, 9-dong 307, 9-dong 207, and 9-dong 207 (the above real estate is referred to as “the instant real estate,” and the Plaintiff, Appointor C, and Appointor D, referred to as “Plaintiff, etc.”), and becomes a member of the Defendant’s association by consenting to the instant business resolution.

③ On September 11, 2010, the Defendant held a general meeting with a resolution, etc. to amend a management and disposition plan as an agenda, and at the general meeting, a resolution was made to approve the amendment of the management and disposition

In the management and disposal plan, 84.77% or 62.31% of the shares of the defendant union members were set at 84.77% or 62.31%, and the free share ratio of the real estate in this case was set at 82.84%.

④ According to the management and disposal plan, the Defendant announced the period of application for parcelling-out to December 20, 2010, the period of application for parcelling-out was from December 17, 2010 to December 20, 2010, but changed the period until December 24, 2010, and thereafter, the period of grace for the parcelling-out contract was issued until February 24, 201, but the Plaintiff et al. became a person subject to cash settlement since the contract for parcelling-out was not concluded even

⑤ On April 11, 2011, the Defendant made an appraisal upon recommendation by two appraisal companies from the head of Ulsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and on May 25, 201, notified the Plaintiff, etc. of the amount of cash liquidation based on the result of the appraisal, and sent a written notice of consultation on the calculation of the amount of liquidation over several occasions, but did not reach an agreement.

(6) On December 29, 2011, the Defendant deposited the amount obtained by deducting the relocation expenses from the average amount of the appraisal result from the foregoing, as head of Ulsan District Court No. 5322 through 5324 in Ulsan District Court in 2011, and only 6,6710,000 won and 8309,000 won to the Plaintiff.