1. The Defendants receive each money stated in the “market price” column in the attached Table 2 List from the Plaintiff at the same time.

1. Presumption

A. As prescribed by the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), the Plaintiff removed existing buildings on the ground outside Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu and 231 square meters (al. 28,33.6 square meters on June 22, 2009) and was established for the purpose of constructing a new building on the land, and was approved by the head of Daegu-gu on August 23, 2007. The Defendants did not join the Plaintiff’s association as co-owners of the land stipulated in paragraph (1) of this Article, which is the land within the housing reconstruction project zone (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On January 23, 2014, the Plaintiff urged at least 75% of the owners of land or buildings to submit a written consent to change the establishment of the association, and passed a resolution on the re-building decision and ratification of the consent to re-building decision related to the authorization to establish the association at the ordinary meeting. On April 2, 2014, the Plaintiff was subject to the approval of change from the head of Daegu-gu Dong.

(c) as shown in the list No. 3 of the relevant statutes.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2-12, 3-12, 4, 5-12, 6, 7-12, 8, 9-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff obtained the consent of 76.3% of the owner of the land, etc. and 77.93% of the area of the land, and obtained a disposition to approve the establishment of the association on April 2, 2014 according to the rebuilding ratification resolution at the ordinary general meeting on January 23, 2014. The said disposition to approve the establishment of the association is deemed to have a new approval

After the disposition for authorization for change of the establishment of an association was issued, the Plaintiff urged the Defendants to respond to whether they agree to the establishment of an association under Article 39 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings and Article 48 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “Aggregate Buildings Act”) and did not respond to whether they agree to the establishment of an association within two months from the date of receipt of the above notice