1. The Defendant does not limit the balance of the Fund Management Account:

A. 20,000,000 won against the Plaintiff A;

B. gold with the Plaintiff B.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. (tentative Name) D Regional Housing Association (hereinafter “instant association”) is a company that has been established for the new construction project of the 998 household units (hereinafter “instant project”) on the land outside Busan Shipping Daegu E-gu and 75 parcels, and the Defendant entered into a contract on September 19, 2014 with the Hypoon Hypoon Co., Ltd., Ltd., the instant association and the business agent for the implementation of the instant project, and the company that entered into a contract on behalf of another (hereinafter “instant agency contract”).

B. The Plaintiffs respectively enter into a membership agreement with the instant association promotion committee, and Plaintiff A entered into a membership agreement on January 7, 2014, and the same year.

9. 18. 17 million won in total, including 17.0 million won in the primary contribution; 3 million won in the subscription on April 4, 2014; 3 million won in the primary contribution on the following day; 11,150,000 won in the second contribution on the 30th of the same month; and 3.0 million won in the second contribution on the 30th of the same month;

7. With respect to the third contribution of KRW 11,150,000 on March 21, 201, only the deposit data of KRW 1,115,00 out of the total amount (as of July 21, 2014) is submitted. However, in light of the method of paying the second contribution of the same amount, it appears that the entire amount was paid.

B, Plaintiff C, on January 7, 2014, KRW 3 million for subscription, and the same year

7. On May 15, 198, the Plaintiffs were also paid business service charges in addition to the aforementioned contributions.

A. Each payment was made.

C. Meanwhile, the application for authorization to establish a housing association submitted by the committee of promoters of the instant association was returned as of March 3, 2015. The grounds for return revealed by the competent authority are ① the legitimate right to use the site for the housing construction project, ② the violation of the standards for the maximum height of buildings for each block (42m), ③ the application for approval to establish a project plan under the name of the company, which had already been submitted before the date of application for authorization to establish a promotion committee, did not meet the requirements for legitimate joint business under Article 10 of the Housing Act. ④