1. The defendant shall receive KRW 623,010,100 from the plaintiff at the same time, and each of the attached list 1 shall be stated in the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an association established for the purpose of implementing a housing reconstruction improvement project (hereinafter “instant reconstruction project”) to remove old and inferior existing buildings located within the area of 59,673.80 square meters in Daegu-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”) and to newly build an apartment 1,069 households and neighborhood living facilities on the ground. The Defendant owns each real estate (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On October 28, 2016, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the establishment of an association from the head of Daegu Metropolitan City, the head of the Gu, and completed the establishment registration on October 31, 2016.

C. The defendant is a person who does not consent to the establishment of the association.

On January 26, 2017, the Plaintiff sent a written peremptory notice to the Defendant within two months from the date of receipt of the written peremptory notice as to whether the Plaintiff consented to the establishment of the association, and the written peremptory notice was served on February 1, 2017 to the Defendant.

However, the defendant did not respond to the above peremptory notice for two months after the receipt of the above peremptory notice.

The Plaintiff, via the instant complaint submitted on April 17, 2017, requested the Defendant to sell the instant real estate owned by the Defendant at the market price pursuant to relevant statutes, and the instant warden was served on the Defendant on April 26, 2017.

E. As of April 26, 2017, the value of the instant real estate is KRW 623,010,100.

[Ground] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 8 evidence (including additional number), the result of the request for appraisal by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff exercised the right to demand sale against the defendant who does not consent to reconstruction. It is deemed that the sales contract was concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant on April 26, 2017, which the plaintiff reached the defendant through the complaint of this case.

Therefore, the defendant is against the plaintiff.