1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff added at the trial to the defendants.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Article 1-D (1) of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance added “The type and amount of claims to be seized and collected” to the following: “The type and amount of claims to be seized and collected are all claims, such as dues and liquidation money, which the reconstruction association holds against the Defendants, including the amount to be collected until they reach the amount in KRW 5,252,616, respectively.”

Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act (in the case of Defendant B, Defendant C (Defendant 1, Defendant 2): Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act is added to column 1.

We examine ex officio the preliminary claims added at the trial.

The plaintiff asserts that when a reconstruction association is liquidated as a future performance lawsuit, the defendants are obligated to pay the amount stated in the claim to the plaintiff.

A future performance suit under Article 251 of the Civil Procedure Act refers to a performance suit seeking performance in advance by asserting a performance claim that satisfies the future at the time of closing of argument, such as a future claim, time-limit claim, and condition precedent claim. If a future performance suit regarding a claim that may arise in the future is lawful, the legal and de facto relationship, which serves as the basis of the occurrence of the claim, should exist at the time of closing of argument, and such situation should be expected to continue, and a claim in advance is required.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da29613 delivered on October 15, 2004, etc.). However, the following circumstances, i.e., the number of remaining assets and remaining debts remaining at the stage of the liquidation procedure after dissolution of a reconstruction association, were not determined, and thus, the reconstruction association’s conclusion is the same.