1. On the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant),

A. Defendant B, D, E, and G are as shown in [Attachment 1] from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

each. described in paragraph 1.

1. The primary facts and counterclaims shall also be deemed to exist.

A. The status of the parties and the current status of real estate 1) The plaintiff is a A apartment constructed in the Dong-gu Daejeon Metropolitan City L Group (hereinafter "the apartment of this case").

On October 31, 2007, in order to carry out a project to remove and reconstruct, it is the Housing Reconstruction Project Association which completed the registration of incorporation on November 3, 200 of the same year with the authorization of establishment from the head of the Dong-gu Daejeon Metropolitan City on October 31, 2007.

ownership of each of the relevant apartment units described in the subsection.

(hereinafter referred to as "multi-real estate" according to the sequences, and the aggregate of these apartments is referred to as "each of the instant real estate". Meanwhile, with respect to each of the relevant apartments owned by Defendant B, D, E, and G, the same Table is different.

The registration of the establishment of a mortgage is completed, such as the seizure or establishment of a mortgage.

B. On December 31, 2008, the Plaintiff obtained the authorization of implementation of the reconstruction project of the instant apartment from the head of the Dong-gu Daejeon Metropolitan City on the implementation of the reconstruction project, and on August 28, 2015, obtained the authorization of modification on the said authorization. 2) On January 29, 2016, the Plaintiff obtained the authorization of the management and disposal plan concerning the reconstruction project of the instant apartment from the head of the Dong-gu Daejeon Metropolitan City, Daejeon Metropolitan City.

C. On September 11, 2015, the Plaintiff publicly announced the period for application for parcelling-out to its members on September 11, 2015 to October 12, 2015, and publicly announced an extension of the period for application for parcelling-out to extend the period for application for parcelling-out to October 22, 2015 on October 13, 2015. The Defendants did not apply for parcelling-out within the said period for parcelling-out. 2) The Defendants did not apply for parcelling-out within the said period.

The statutes related to the instant case, including relevant statutes, and the articles of incorporation of the Plaintiff are as follows.

[The Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents]

[2] The owner of land, etc. who intends to obtain an allotment of a site or structure within the period of application for parcelling-out under paragraph (1).