1. The Defendants are the respective amount indicated in the “recognised purchase price” column in the attached Form 2 List from the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and rearrangement project association established to implement a housing reconstruction and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant project”) on the scale of 19,768 square meters in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government. The Defendants are owners of each real estate listed in the attached Table 3 Real Estate List (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) located within the instant project zone and the Defendants’ ownership status of each real estate of this case is as indicated in the attached Table 2.

B. From July 2, 2013, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendants a written peremptory notice to the effect that, within two months, whether the Defendants agree to the establishment of the Plaintiff’s association pursuant to Article 39 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) and Article 48 of the “Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings,” the Plaintiff sent it by content-certified mail. However, Defendant E, F, G, H, I, J, K, K, and L (hereinafter “Defendant E, etc.”) did not reach the delivery, and the remainder of the Defendants received it did not reply within two months thereafter.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit and stated in the complaint that the Plaintiff shall exercise the right to sell the said Defendants’ real estate, and that the Plaintiff shall exercise the right to sell the real estate owned by the said Defendants. ② As to the Defendant E et al. who did not arrive at the highest order, the Plaintiff notified whether the Plaintiff consented to the establishment of the Plaintiff’s association and stated the intent to exercise the right to sell the real estate, and attached a

The duplicate of the complaint of this case was served on the Defendants as indicated below. The eight defendants E et al. did not answer whether they agree to the establishment of the plaintiff association by the date of closing argument of this case, after two months from the receipt of the duplicate of the complaint.

(2) N on February 25, 2012 N on December 25, 2014, the service date of Defendant 1 E No. 1- on the date of service by Defendant 1- on the date of service by December 27, 2013 No. 1283, Feb. 15, 2013;