1. According to the expansion and addition of the purport of the claim in the trial, the judgment of the first instance is modified as follows:

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is the party. 1) The defendant is the defendant's apartment complex with 123 consent within 123 D apartment complexes on the land of Songpa-gu Seoul and 13 lots (hereinafter "the apartment complex of this case").

) and the instant apartment complex 37, 44, 69, 85 was divided into the decentralization of 9 households located under the ground of the 37, 44, 69, and 85, and the 2-Dong commercial buildings [one comprehensive shopping district under the divided ownership of 203 households (hereinafter referred to as the “instant comprehensive shopping district”) and the 10 households divided into one unit in Songpa-gu Seoul, where the 10 households divided by 10 households.

[2] The Housing Construction Promotion Act, which was approved to establish a housing association by the head of Songpa-gu on September 12, 2001 as members of a sectional owner 5,612 households who consent to the reconstruction resolution, was established under the Housing Construction Promotion Act. The Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents on December 30, 202 (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).

As the Act was enacted and enforced from July 1, 2003, the registration of incorporation was completed on July 30, 2003, and on March 17, 2004, the reconstruction project of the apartment complex of this case (hereinafter “the reconstruction project of this case”) shall be conducted with the approval from the Administrator of Songpa-gu on March 17, 2004.

(2) As a sectional owner of the above comprehensive price, the Plaintiffs owned each real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table 1 (hereinafter referred to as “real estate owned by the Plaintiff”) and each real estate listed in paragraph (2) of the attached Table 2 (hereinafter referred to as “B-owned real estate”). The Plaintiffs owned each real estate owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “each real estate owned by the Plaintiff”) but did not join the Defendant Cooperative against the reconstruction promoted by the Defendant.

B. The Plaintiff’s lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of the reconstruction resolution 1) The C Apartment Rebuilding Promotion Committee established to reconstruct the apartment complex of this case (hereinafter “the apartment reconstruction promotion committee of this case”).

Around September 1993, the apartment complex of this case reaches about 90% of the entire sectional owners of the apartment complex of this case from 4,863 households.