1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant is paid KRW 304,692,650 from the plaintiff.

1. The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the following facts: there is no dispute between the parties, or the entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers); the court of first instance entrusted the market price appraisal of appraiser D; and the purport of the argument as a result of fact inquiry.

On October 8, 2008, pursuant to Article 16 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter referred to as the "Urban Improvement Act"), the Plaintiff obtained authorization from the head of Seodaemun-gu, and completed the establishment registration on November 6, 2008. On January 26, 2012, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the implementation of the project for the Seoul Seodaemun-gu Seoul Seodaemun-gu as the project implementation district for the maintenance and improvement project, and on March 23, 2012, announced the expiration date of the application for parcelling-out on May 17, 2012.

B. The Defendant, as the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet in the maintenance project implementation district (hereinafter “instant real estate”), agreed to the rebuilding resolution for the establishment of the Plaintiff’s association, and did not apply for parcelling-out by the expiration date of the application period for parcelling-out.

C. The market value of the instant real estate as of May 18, 2012 is KRW 304,692,650 (including the part on a rooftop).

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Since the Defendant, which caused the Plaintiff’s claim, loses its membership as an association member because he did not file an application for parcelling-out by the expiration date of the period for application for parcelling-out and became a person subject to cash liquidation, the Plaintiff exercises the right to claim a sale under Article 39 of the Urban Improvement Act by serving a written complaint of this case. The Defendant is obligated to receive from the Plaintiff the payment of KRW 271,131,785, which is the remainder of the amount calculated by deducting the amount equivalent to the Defendant’s share out of the rearrangement project expenses incurred during the period in which the Defendant was holding its membership, from the market price of the instant real estate as liquidation amount, from the amount calculated by deducting the amount equivalent to the Defendant’s share out of the rearrangement project expenses incurred during the period in which the Plaintiff was holding its membership.

(b).