1. The Defendants shall pay the respective money stated in the corresponding “the Dong City Implementation Amount” in the attached Form 1 trading statement from the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s establishment and the Defendants’ establishment of the Plaintiff 1) The Plaintiff is the Seo-gu Incheon Seo-gu H Il-gi 15,244.5 square meters (hereinafter “instant improvement zone”).

In the case of A apartment reconstruction rearrangement project (hereinafter referred to as “instant rearrangement project”)

In order to enforce the Act, the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (wholly amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter “former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents”) which completed the establishment registration on November 12, 2015 after obtaining authorization from the head of Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City head of the Gu on November 11, 201

(2) The Defendants are owners of each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2 in the separate sheet No. 2 in the instant rearrangement zone (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and did not express their consent to the establishment of the association at the time the Plaintiff was established.

B. The Plaintiff’s letter of peremptory notice is sent and served 1) The Plaintiff is entitled to Article 39 of the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “Aggregate Buildings

Pursuant to Article 48, on November 23, 2015, the Defendants’ reply to whether to consent to the establishment of an association and, if they do not reply within two months, a peremptory notice to the effect that they will exercise the right to demand sale (Evidence A No. 4-1 through 5, 7, hereinafter “instant peremptory notice”).

(2) Although Defendant B, D, E, and G were served on November 24, 2015, Defendant C was served on November 25, 2015, Defendant C did not answer to whether it consented to the establishment of the association within two months thereafter.

Defendant E asserts to the effect that the Plaintiff cannot exercise the right to demand sale since the instant peremptory notice was not served lawfully.

Domins, Gap No. 4-4-.