1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B is paid KRW 53,000,000 from the Plaintiff, and at the same time, set forth in [Attachment Table 1].

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and improvement project association under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents established to implement a reconstruction project of multi-family housing, etc. (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), and the Defendants are those who own real estate in the above project area as shown in the attached list.

(hereinafter referred to as "each real estate of this case" and "the first real estate", "the second real estate", and "the third real estate" according to the order of priority.

On August 19, 2016, the Plaintiff obtained authorization to establish an association on September 27, 2016, and obtained registration of incorporation on September 23, 2016. On November 23, 2016, the Plaintiff sent a written peremptory notice of claim for sale stating that “to exercise the right to demand sale pursuant to Article 39 of the former Act on Urban Improvement (wholly amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter the same shall apply), “Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings,” and Article 48 of the “Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings,” respectively, to the real estate owners in the project area, including the Defendants, who do not consent to the establishment of an association.”

Around that time, a peremptory notice was served against Defendant D, but it was not served due to the return of the peremptory notice to Defendant B and C.

C. On March 15, 2017, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendants on March 15, 2017, and exercised the right to demand sale under Article 39 of the former Act and Article 48 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings or notified the Defendants of their intent to demand sale. Defendant D was served with a copy of each complaint on April 5, 2017; Defendant C was served on May 19, 2017; and Defendant B was served on June 5, 2017.

An appraiser F shall be the part of each real estate of this case subject to sectional ownership pursuant to the provisions of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and the Evaluation of Appraisal and Appraisal.