1. The defendant,

A. Of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 18,374.3 square meters, the “BV” column in the attached Table (1) shall apply to each share indicated in the attached Table.

1. Basic facts

A. In around 1979, the Defendant newly built CB,CC, CD, and CE a CF apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”)’s ancillary and welfare facilities, and completed the registration of ownership preservation. From the late 1970s to the early 1980s, the Defendant sold to the buyers specific shares of the instant commercial building, each subparagraph and the said CB.

B. Seoul, Gangnam-gu Seoul, etc.: (a) around April 1992, part of the building was divided into BV 18,374.3 square meters in Seocho-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “BV land”), and (b) BW around April 1993, Seoul was divided into BW 23,051 square meters in size (hereinafter “BW land”), BX large 1,175.6 square meters in size (hereinafter “BX land”), regardless of whether before or after division, regardless of whether it was before or after division); (b) the Plaintiffs were the buyers who directly purchased shares of the specific shares of the instant commercial building from the Defendant, or who received or completed the registration of ownership transfer from the buyer by inheritance or by inheritance by gift, etc. (BV, BV, BW, X, and X’s specific shares of the instant commercial building from the buyer.

C. Meanwhile, in Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seoul, BY Miscellaneous land (hereinafter “BY land”) adjacent to each of the above lands was managed as a land allotted in recompense for replotting by Seoul, by combining BV, BY, BY, BW, and BX land. However, after completing the replotting procedure in around 1992, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City transferred some of the instant apartment owners of the instant apartment after completing the replotting procedure, and most of the co-owners of the instant apartment that did not have been transferred their shares at the time, completed the registration of ownership transfer from Seoul Special Metropolitan City on April 13, 2016 as to the share equivalent to the ratio of the former deposit area among BY land.

On March 20, 1992, the owner of the commercial building of this case did not transfer his/her share to each other.