1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an association established pursuant to the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter “former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents”; hereinafter “former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents”, and “Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents” is referred to as “Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents” to implement a housing reconstruction improvement project for removing old and inferior existing buildings located within 59,673.80 square meters (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”).

B. On October 21, 2016, the Plaintiff’s overall transfer, “F Housing Reconstruction and Improvement Project Association Establishment Promotion Committee” (hereinafter “instant promotion committee”) obtained authorization to establish an association from the head of the Daegu Metropolitan City (hereinafter “the head of the Nam-gu”) on October 28, 2016, after filing an application for authorization to establish the association, and completed the registration of incorporation on October 31, 2016.

C. The Defendant owned the instant real estate located within the instant rearrangement zone, but did not consent to establish an association.

On January 26, 2017, the Plaintiff sent a peremptory notice to the Defendant stating that “In the absence of a written reply within two months from the date of receipt of the peremptory notice, the Plaintiff shall urge the Defendant to reply in writing as to whether to participate in the instant reconstruction project, and, in the absence of a written reply within the said period, the Plaintiff shall be deemed not to participate in the reconstruction pursuant to Article 39 of the former Act and Article 48 of the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter “the Act”), and the said peremptory notice was served on February 1, 2017 to the Defendant.

However, the defendant did not reply to the above peremptory notice until two months have passed since the receipt of the above peremptory notice.

The Plaintiff submitted on April 17, 2017 to the Defendant through the instant complaint in accordance with relevant statutes.