1. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) on April 30, 2012 regarding each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant union was established to implement the reconstruction improvement project of the A market located in the Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City N (hereinafter “instant project”), and was authorized by the head of the Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Office on February 12, 2008.

B. Defendant B is the president of the Defendant Union, and Defendant I is the auditor, Defendant C, D, E, F, G, H, and J of the Defendant Union.

C. The Defendant Union received the application for parcelling-out from March 24, 2009 to May 12, 2009 after obtaining authorization for project implementation from the head of Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City on October 30, 2008, and the management and disposal plan was approved by the head of Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City on May 19, 2009 by holding a general meeting of management and disposal on May 22, 2009.

On July 29, 2010, the general meeting was held to revise the management and disposition plan and was authorized on December 14, 2010.

On September 12, 2008, the Defendant Union entered into a contract for the instant construction project with the Master Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Master Comprehensive Construction”), but the Master Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Master Comprehensive Construction”) entered into the instant contract for the instant construction project (hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract”) on March 201, setting the Plaintiff and the construction cost as KRW 24,180,450,00 (excluding value-added tax) on April 30, 2012.

At the time of the instant contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant Mutual Aid Association agreed to bear only the determined shares of the members of the Defendant Mutual Aid Association regarding the method of business and to be supplied with the corresponding new buildings. Of the new buildings, the Plaintiff and the Defendant Mutual Aid Association decided to take the method of determining shares by appropriating the Plaintiff’s construction cost, project cost, etc. with the business profits, such as the additional shares of the remaining new

E. Under the instant contract, the Plaintiff is a neighborhood living facilities, sales facilities, and one unit of collective housing (hereinafter “instant building”) of the first floor, the 18th floor above ground pursuant to the instant contract.