1. The decision of the court of first instance has become final and conclusive below with respect to K in the administrator of the District Housing Association for Debtor Rehabilitation.

1. Basic facts

A. The status V regional housing association (tentatively referred to as the "W regional housing association"; hereinafter referred to as the "Gu housing association") was dissolved when it implemented the housing construction project (hereinafter referred to as the "the housing project in this case") with LW as a project implementation district. The J regional housing association (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant association") was established for the purpose of carrying out a new housing construction project, which is a project implementation district, holding an inaugural general meeting on May 18, 2007, and obtained authorization from the subordinate market on August 6, 2007, and the Co-Defendant I Co-Defendant I (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant I") of the first instance trial conducted the project jointly with the Defendant association from the stage of the establishment of the Defendant association, which was a company that vicariously carried out the project implementation of the former association.

B. While joining and withdrawing the Plaintiffs’ association, the Plaintiffs subscribed to the former association or the Defendant association, and paid to I each money indicated in the “amount of payment” column for each Plaintiff on the same date as indicated in the “date of payment” column in the attached Table of “Date of Payment” as an advance payment for the housing project of the instant case, and thereafter, the Plaintiffs, while withdrawing from the Defendant association, intended to receive the said application amount from I and submitted a written confirmation of withdrawing partners

C. According to the I’s accounting report from April 5, 2007 to March 5, 2009 against the Defendant Union prepared by that accounting corporation, the Defendant Union was liable for the Defendant Union’s obligation to pay KRW 9,011,661,244 to I as of March 5, 2009 (hereinafter “instant loan”).

2) Meanwhile, in a lawsuit claiming the return of agreed amount brought by some of the members of the Defendant Union against I and the Defendant Union, the fact that the Defendant Union bears the above loan obligations against I and the fact that I is insolvent was recognized.

Seoul Central District Court 2009Gahap82027, Seoul Northern District Court 2009Gahap5449 and each of them.