1. Defendant B received KRW 1,933,339,680 from the Plaintiff, and Defendant C and D received KRW 1,596,669,840 from the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. In order to promote a reconstruction project (hereinafter “instant reconstruction project”) on a building site of 63,289,10 square meters in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, the Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and improvement project association that obtained authorization from the head of Seocho-gu on March 9, 2015 pursuant to the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (wholly amended by Act No. 14576, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter “former Act”).

The Defendants were members of the Plaintiff, who agreed to establish the association, among Defendant B-A-2 shares, Defendant C-D shares in each of the 1/4 shares in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government M land and its ground buildings (hereinafter referred to as “land and buildings”) located within the instant reconstruction project zone (hereinafter referred to as “instant real estate,” and the part of the building is referred to as “instant building”).

B. On July 13, 2016, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the implementation of a project from the head of Seocho-gu Office on July 13, 2016, and publicly announced the application period for parcelling-out as the period for applying for parcelling-out from June 13, 2017 to July 14, 2017, and extended the last day of the application period for parcelling-out to July 28, 2017.

However, the defendants did not file an application for parcelling-out during the period of each of the above applications for parcelling-out.

C. On October 17, 2017, the Plaintiff formulated a management and disposal plan at the general meeting of its members based on the status of application for parcelling-out by its members.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry in Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including each number, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. In relation to a housing reconstruction project for the establishment of a sales contract following the exercise of the right to request sale, a person subject to a cash settlement has the status as a partner because he/she loses his/her status as a person subject to sale due to reasons such as failing to apply for sale, etc., and thus has a status corresponding to an withdrawal of the association. Therefore, a reconstruction association shall be subject to cash settlement by applying mutatis mutandis