1. The defendant shall receive KRW 877,984,420 from the plaintiff and at the same time indicate the attached list real estate in the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction project partnership that completed establishment registration on October 31, 2016 after obtaining authorization from the head of the Daegu Metropolitan City on October 28, 2016 to implement housing reconstruction improvement projects whose project implementation district covers 59,673.80 square meters (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”).

B. The Defendant is the owner of each real estate indicated in the real estate indication column in the separate sheet located in the instant rearrangement zone (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”).

C. On January 26, 2017, the Plaintiff urged the Defendant to reply in writing within two months from the date of receipt of the written peremptory notice, and if it is deemed that the Plaintiff did not consent to the establishment of the association, or did not reply within two months, and did not consent, the Plaintiff sent the written peremptory notice to the effect that it shall exercise the right to demand sale (hereinafter “the instant peremptory notice”) pursuant to Article 39 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”). The instant peremptory notice was served on the Defendant on January 31, 2017.

The Plaintiff did not reply to whether the Defendant consented to the establishment of the association within two months from the date of receiving the above content-certified mail, and filed the instant lawsuit seeking the implementation and delivery of the ownership transfer registration procedure while filing a claim for sale of each of the instant real estate with the Defendant on April 17, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 8 (including virtual numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The fact that the defendant, who entered into a sales contract upon the exercise of the right to demand sale, was served with the notice of this case and did not reply to the establishment of the association within 2 months, is not a dispute between the parties, and the defendant is owned by an aggregate building.