The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a regional housing association established to implement a regional housing project (hereinafter “instant project”) that newly constructs an apartment of 434 households’ regional housing association (hereinafter “association apartment”) on the ground of 22,518 square meters in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si (hereinafter “instant project site”).

On November 7, 2016, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the establishment of a regional housing association from the Kimpo market.

B. On May 16, 2016, the Defendant entered into a membership agreement of the regional housing association (hereinafter “instant contract”) that joined as the Plaintiff’s partner, and paid KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff.

(c)

According to the contract of this case, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 231.6 million with the contributions of its members and KRW 10 million with the expenses for the promotion of its business (Article 7(1)), KRW 10 million out of the contributions of its members at the time of the contract, and KRW 4.1.6 million out of the contributions of its members within 10 days after the contract is concluded (Article 7(2)). [Ground for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute over the ground for recognition], the evidence set forth in subparagraph 1, subparagraph 2, each statement of subparagraph 2, and the previous purport of oral argument.

2. Assertion and determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 4,160,000,000 among the union members’ contributions and KRW 1,416,00,000,000 among the union members’ contributions until May 26, 2016, which was ten (10) days after the date of entering into the instant contract, barring any special circumstances.

B. (1) The Defendant’s assertion that the contract termination is terminated is not approved as a housing construction project because the Plaintiff failed to purchase the land equivalent to 95% of the project site of this case.

In recent years, the existing land seller terminated the sales contract on the ground of the unpaid balance, and if the sales contract is terminated, the acquisition rate of land does not exceed 50%.

In addition, the plaintiff does not undertake the project due to the division of executive department between several years and the dispute with the contractor and the agency.