1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning Defendant K is modified as follows:

Defendant K from the Plaintiff 88,00.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the Plaintiff of the parties to a housing reconstruction improvement project that obtained authorization from the head of Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on January 21, 2016 to implement a reconstruction improvement project on a 23,266.4 square meters in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

Defendant K is the owner of Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government AH large scale 80 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant K’s land”) located within the said improvement project site.

Defendant T is the owner of the Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Up to 50 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant T-land”) located within the said improvement project site, and each of the above land is the owner of each of the instant land in total.

B. On June 12, 2016, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit, and stated that the delivery of a copy of the complaint attached by the written peremptory notice would substitute for the peremptory notice on the right to demand sale, and the Defendants should reply to whether they agree to the establishment of the association within two months from the day following the delivery date of the duplicate of the complaint. (ii) The Defendants were served with the duplicate of the instant complaint, and did not reply to whether they consented to the establishment of the association within two months thereafter.

3) On August 24, 2016, the date two months elapsed from the date the duplicate of the complaint of this case was served on the Defendants. According to the market price appraisal result, the market price of Defendant K’s land at the time is KRW 348,80,000, and the market price of Defendant T’s land is KRW 213,50,000. [In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entry of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 11-3, and 11-9, and the result of each request for appraisal by the appraiser A of the first instance trial, the purport of the entire pleadings is as follows

2. Determination

A. According to the fact that the Plaintiff’s claim for sale against the Defendants was established, the Defendants did not reply to whether the Defendants consented to the establishment of the Plaintiff by the lapse of two months from the date of receipt of a duplicate of the complaint of this case containing a peremptory notice as to the establishment of the Housing Reconstruction Project Association. As such, the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017).