1. The plaintiffs confirm that they are members with the right to sell the C Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project implemented by the defendant.

2...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 24, 2011, the Defendant is the implementer of the instant project, who obtained authorization for establishing an association with respect to the C Housing Redevelopment Project (hereinafter “instant project”) whose project implementation district covers 83,207m2 from Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si (hereinafter “instant project”), and obtained authorization for implementing the project on March 9, 2017 (Public Notice E in Suwon-si).

B. Plaintiff A completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 11, 2015 due to the sale on March 3, 2015, with respect to the housing, retail stores, offices, and multi-united buildings with 134/145 square meters in Suwon-si, Suwon-si (Seoul-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si), which is located within the rearrangement zone of the instant project, and with respect to the housing, retail stores, offices, and multi-united buildings on the ground of 145 square meters in the H large 145 square meters, and the Plaintiff B completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 2, 2016 due to the sale on December 28, 2015.

C. However, under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, the defendant did not notify the plaintiffs of the application period for parcelling-out, and the plaintiffs failed to apply for parcelling-out

【Confession based on Recognition】 (Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiffs could not file the above application because the defendant failed to notify the fact that the plaintiffs were in the status to apply for parcelling-out concerning the project of this case as members who own land and buildings within the rearrangement zone of the project of this case.

In addition, as long as the defendant does not recognize the status of the plaintiffs' member, there are interests in confirmation.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims are justified and acceptable.