beta
Text
1. The defendant shall receive KRW 103,200,000 from the plaintiff, and at the same time, shall be each real estate listed in the attached list to the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is the owner of each real estate (hereinafter “instant real estate”) indicated in the separate sheet located within the instant reconstruction project zone under the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (wholly amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter “former Act”) in order to promote the housing reconstruction project (hereinafter “instant reconstruction project”) on a housing site of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 15,945 square meters, in accordance with the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (wholly amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017);
B. On April 13, 2018, the Plaintiff sent a peremptory notice to the Defendant stating that “The Plaintiff shall reply in writing within two months from the date of receipt of the peremptory notice, and if there is no reply, he/she shall be deemed as consenting to the establishment of the association, and shall exercise the right to demand sale under Article 39 of the former Act on Urban Improvement and Article 48 of the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter “the instant peremptory notice”), and the said peremptory notice reached the Defendant on April 16, 2018.
C. On August 9, 2018, when filing the instant lawsuit against the Defendant, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to exercise the claim for sale pursuant to relevant statutes, such as Article 39 of the former Urban Improvement Act, by serving a duplicate of the instant complaint on the Defendant. The duplicate of the instant complaint was served on the Defendant on September 14, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Gap evidence 5 and 6 respectively, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the facts of the establishment of a sales contract upon the exercise of the right to demand sale, the Defendant responded to the effect that the Plaintiff does not consent to the establishment of the association, since the Defendant did not reply within two months after receipt of the instant peremptory notice from the Plaintiff.