1. All of the plaintiff's primary and conjunctive lawsuits shall be dismissed;

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 2, 2003, the Defendant obtained authorization for the establishment of B apartment reconstruction project (hereinafter “instant project”) from the head of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on December 2, 2003 for the purpose of implementing B apartment reconstruction project (hereinafter “the instant project”). The Defendant was the Defendant’s member who owned B apartment No. 204, Dong-dong.

B. On June 29, 2006, the defendant obtained the approval of the implementation of a housing reconstruction project from the head of Suwon-si, and notified its members, including the plaintiff, to apply for parcelling-out from February 1, 2007 to March 2, 2007. ② The period for applying for parcelling-out extended on March 16, 2007 to the plaintiff and its members including the plaintiff extended the period for application for parcelling-out to March 16, 2007 to notify its members of the application for parcelling-out (hereinafter referred to as the "application period for parcelling-out in this case"), and the plaintiff did not inform its members of the application for parcelling-out in cash under the former Urban and Residential Environment Improvement Act (amended by Act No. 9729, May 27, 2009; hereinafter referred to as the "Urban Improvement Act") and the defendant's articles of incorporation.

C. On December 3, 2007, the Defendant obtained the approval of the management and disposal plan from the head of Suwon-si (hereinafter “the first management and disposal plan”), but the Defendant cancelled the contract with the Defendant on the grounds that the effectiveness of the corporation, which is a contractor, has failed to implement the project. On April 23, 2012, the Plaintiff was subject to the revocation of the first management and disposal plan. D. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant to pay cash settlement money, and the Daegu High Court (201Na5036, the appellate court), the appellate court, following the first instance court, did not file an application for parcelling-out with the Plaintiff on April 5, 2012, thereby establishing a cash settlement relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the date following the expiration of the period for application for parcelling-out, and at the same time, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay settlement money.