1. The plaintiff's appeal and the main and ancillary claims added at the trial are all dismissed.

2. Appeal;

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as follows, except where the plaintiff added the judgment on the primary and conjunctive claims added by the court of first instance to the court of first instance as stated in paragraph (2). Thus, it is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. The addition;

A. The plaintiff's main claim is a selective claim for the claim for damages equivalent to the rent out of the tort claim. The defendant asserts to the purport that the defendant is obliged to pay 36,68,580 won and delay damages to the plaintiff, inasmuch as he could not use and benefit from the real estate of this case and the land E site of Seodaemun-gu Seoul (hereinafter "the site of this case") in the state that the plaintiff could not use and benefit from the real estate of this case and E site of this case without completing the compensation in advance after he acquired the status of the person in charge of cash liquidation. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay 36,68,580 won and delay damages to the plaintiff.

The purport of Article 47 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) stipulating that a reconstruction association shall liquidate land, etc. in cash against the owners of land, etc. who failed to file an application for parcelling-out or have withdrawn an application for parcelling-out, shall be deemed to have determined to pay in cash without recognizing the return of the invested goods in case where a member is to be liquidated by losing his/her membership status after performing the

(see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da110477, 110484, Nov. 28, 2013). Each statement in subparagraphs 1 through 12 (including the number of each branch number) are considered as a whole comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings, and the following circumstances are as follows. The Plaintiff immediately applies for a parcel within the period for parcelling-out as stipulated in Article 46 of the Urban Improvement Act and the articles of incorporation after the public notice of authorization for project implementation.