beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B received KRW 123,00,000 from the Plaintiff and simultaneously entered in Annex 1 List 1.
Reasons
1. Indication of claim;
A. 1) The Plaintiff established a sales contract for the purpose of implementing a reconstruction project on the land surface of the member I and ten parcels in Ansan-si, Ansan-si (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).
(2) The Defendants are owners of each of the relevant real estate stated in [Attachment 2] [Attachment 2] in the relevant project site. The Defendants are owners of each real estate indicated in the “real estate subject to sale” column.
3) B, C, D, E, and F prior to the filing of the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff sent the content-certified mail demanding reply to whether the Plaintiff consented to the establishment of the association. However, the said Defendants did not make any reply within two months from the date on which the said proof was served. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s delivery of a copy of the instant complaint to the said Defendants to the said Defendants, thereby constituting the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings and Article 39 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “Aggregate Buildings Act”).
[Attachment 2] Pursuant to Article 48 of the Act, the Plaintiff filed a claim for sale of each of the pertinent real estate stated in [Attachment 2] “real estate subject to sale” at the market price. Therefore, the effect of exercising the right to demand sale has occurred on the day when a copy of the instant complaint was served, and the sales contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the said Defendants. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff issued a peremptory notice to Defendant G and J as to whether the establishment of the association was consented by the delivery of a copy of the instant complaint, and exercised the right to demand sale pursuant to Article 39 of the Urban Improvement Act and Article 48 of the Multi-Family Building Act, but the said Defendants
Therefore, each contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the said Defendants on the following day after the duplicate of the complaint of this case was served on each of the Defendants, namely, the period of reply that became due, the two months have elapsed since the delivery date of the duplicate of the complaint of this case.
5. The plaintiff.