1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where the defendant further claims as to the violation of the good faith principle.

2. Even if a member of an additional reconstruction association applies for parcelling-out, he/she may become a cash liquidation agent by way of failing to conclude a parcelling-out contract;

The defendant, after making the application for parcelling-out, stated that the plaintiff will be paid a cash settlement without entering into the contract for parcelling-out.

According to the Standard Articles of Incorporation (hereinafter referred to as the "Standard Articles of Incorporation") of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, a cooperative shall conclude a sales contract within a specified period after the approval of its management and disposal plan.

However, from November 14, 2017, the Plaintiff’s act of seeking delivery of the instant building without giving the Defendant an opportunity to settle the sales contract in cash by failing to conduct the procedures for concluding the sales contract in violation of the standard Articles of incorporation and the articles of incorporation from November 14, 2017.

On the other hand, the plaintiff's claim cannot be deemed to violate the principle of good faith for reasons as alleged.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2018Da260015 Decided December 27, 2018). This part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted on the ground of its reasoning.

The judgment of the court of first instance with the same conclusion is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is without merit.