Defendant B, C, D, E, F, and G receive each corresponding money from the Plaintiff in the “sale price” column in the attached list.

Facts of recognition

The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction improvement association established under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) to implement a housing reconstruction improvement project for the J apartment unit located in Daegu Dong-gu I (hereinafter “instant project site”). On March 14, 2016, the Plaintiff was authorized to establish an association by the head of the Daegu Metropolitan City Dong-gu Dong-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City on the same year.

3. 16. Completion of the registration of establishment of the partnership.

The Defendants are owners of each relevant real estate indicated in the “real estate indication” column in the attached list located within the project site of this case (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”).

Defendant H (hereinafter “Defendant H”) entered the real estate listed in paragraph (7) of the attached Table No. 7 (hereinafter “instant own cooking”) in the list of fundamental property for education at K University established and operated by Defendant H, and allows female students in the third and fourth years to use the nursing department as their own cooking during the period of practice at L Hospital.

Pursuant to Article 39 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings and Article 48 (1) of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter referred to as the “Aggregate Buildings Act”), the Plaintiff sent by mail a document stating that “the Defendants, who did not consent to the establishment of the partnership or consented to the establishment of the partnership, have withdrawn their intent before the authorization was granted for the establishment of the partnership, shall urge the Defendants to reply within two months to whether they agree to the establishment of the partnership or not, and if they do not reply thereto, they shall exercise the right to demand sale (hereinafter referred to as “written demand”). The remaining Defendants, other than Defendant F, did not reply to whether they agree two months after the date of receipt of the written demand, and the written demand was not served on Defendant F.

The plaintiff filed the suit in this case, and there is no reply to the letter of peremptory notice against the defendant B, C, D, E, G, and H, and therefore the service of a duplicate of the complaint in this case is attached to the above defendants' ownership.