1. The principal lawsuit between the Plaintiff and the Defendants was terminated on August 24, 2016 by the final and conclusive decision of recommending reconciliation.

2...

1. Progress of the lawsuit;

A. The Plaintiff is an autonomous management body that consists of representatives elected by the occupants of 910 households of the 14 Dong-dong, Jung-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si (hereinafter “instant apartment”), and Defendant CHousing Reconstruction and Improvement Project Association (hereinafter “Union”) is a project proprietor who sold the instant apartment.

Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “B”) received a new construction of the instant apartment from the Defendant Partnership, and Defendant D Co., Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “D”) guaranteed the Defendant Partnership’s obligation to repair the defects of the instant apartment.

B. On September 11, 2012, the Plaintiff acquired from the sectional owners of 799 households among the total 910 households of the instant apartment, a claim for damages in lieu of the defect repair that the Plaintiff had against the Defendant Cooperative pursuant to Article 9 of the former Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (amended by Act No. 9172, Dec. 26, 2008; hereinafter “former Act”). On September 11, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant Cooperative for the payment of damages in lieu of the defect repair of the instant apartment, in lieu of the defect repair of the instant apartment.

C. The Intervenor applied for intervention as an independent party on March 2, 2015.

On August 1, 2016, this Court rendered a ruling of recommending reconciliation to the Plaintiff and the Defendants, and the said ruling was served on the Plaintiff on August 9, 2016, and each of the Defendants was served on the Defendants on August 5, 2016, and both parties did not object to the said ruling.

2. The intervenor asserts that the right of the intervenor regarding the defect, etc. of the part of exclusive ownership and the section for common use was infringed upon according to the result of the principal lawsuit, and sought damages in lieu of the defect repair as to the part of exclusive ownership and the section for common use of the intervenor against the defendants, and sought damages corresponding to the part of exclusive ownership of the intervenor against the plaintiff.