1. On June 12, 2019, the Defendant determined the Plaintiff as a cash settlement agent among the management and disposal plans authorized by the king Mayor.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association established to implement a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”) in Guangsi-si and 462 square meters of land (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”), and the Plaintiff is the owner of the land, etc. who owns two-story housing units of D ground lighting groups at the time of king-si in the said project area (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. The Defendant was authorized to implement the project on April 11, 2018 from the Gosking market.

C. On April 24, 2018, the Defendant publicly announced the period for application for parcelling-out by setting the period for application for parcelling-out from April 25, 2018 to June 8, 2018, and publicly announced the period for application for parcelling-out on May 28, 2018, extended the period for application for parcelling-out from May 30, 2018 to June 8, 2018.

After the Defendant resolved at the general meeting of the partners on June 12, 2019, the Defendant obtained authorization of the management and disposition plan (hereinafter “instant management and disposition plan”) from the head of Eunpyeong-gu.

E. The instant management and disposition plan is classified by the Plaintiff as the subject of cash settlement.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Gap evidence 4-1, 2, and Gap evidence 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the management and disposal plan of this case is legitimate

A. According to Article 7(2) of the articles of incorporation of the Defendant Union’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant shall notify each of the matters concerning the rights and obligations of the union members by registered mail in order to publicly announce and notify such matters. In a case where registered mail is returned, the Defendant shall additionally send

However, although the registered mail of the notice of extension of the period for application for parcelling-out has been returned to the plaintiff, the defendant did not send it by regular mail.

Therefore, the part of the management and disposal plan of this case where the notice procedure for extension of the period for application for parcelling-out to the plaintiff is not implemented is illegal.

(b) relation.