1. Of the instant lawsuits, the part of the claim for KRW 841,708,39 and damages for delay shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a maintenance and improvement project association established on May 19, 2006 for the redevelopment project of the housing unit in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 12-37, Seongdong-gu, and the Plaintiff (the name before the change on June 3, 2014): the Plaintiff (Hasang 2 Saemaul Savings Depository) is the owner of a commercial building located in the Defendant’s improvement project zone (hereinafter “previous commercial building”).

The original owner was the king Saemaeul Community Fund, but on December 11, 2012, the plaintiff succeeded to the status of the member by absorbing the king Saemaeul Community Fund.

B. In the process of implementing the rearrangement project, the Defendant assessed the value of the previous commercial building as KRW 1,280,140,300 (land share 1,177,740,000, building share 102,400,300).

Since October 17, 2015, the right value of the previous commercial building was determined as KRW 1,028,592,731 as the final proportion applied to the association members at the general meeting of the management and disposal of the defendant on October 17, 2015.

C. The Defendant set the sales price at KRW 2,509,041,60 in total with respect to the sales price for the 403rd, 130 and 130 second floor (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) where the Plaintiff was scheduled to sell in lots among the commercial buildings that will be completed due to the implementation of the improvement project.

However, on December 21, 2012, the Defendant, through the board of directors on December 21, 2012, decided to sell all the building including the instant commercial buildings in general by the method of a blanket sale (so-called “through sale”). Accordingly, on May 3, 2013, the Defendant concluded a sales contract for the instant commercial buildings with the E-plplers Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E-plers”) on the aggregate of the sales proceeds and the sales proceeds.

E. On May 27, 2013, the Plaintiff, upon the Defendant’s decision to collectively sell the instant commercial building, entered into a resale agreement with the Epirator on May 27, 2013, under which the total purchase price was 3,350,749,99. After paying Epir the purchase price in full, the Plaintiff occupied the instant commercial building on February 28, 2014.

recognized.