1. Defendant B received KRW 312,00,000 from the Plaintiff at the same time, and at the same time, set forth in the separate sheet No. 1.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and improvement project association that obtained authorization from the head of Seocho-gu Office on October 20, 2016 pursuant to the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (wholly amended by Act No. 14576, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter “former Act”) to promote a housing reconstruction project (hereinafter “instant reconstruction project”) on a site of 4,882 square meters in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D D, Seocho-gu.

Defendant B is the owner of the title 1 real estate in the separate sheet located within the instant reconstruction project zone (hereinafter “instant title 1 real estate”). Defendant C is the owner of the title 2 real estate in the separate sheet located within the said project zone (hereinafter “instant title 2 real estate”; hereinafter “instant title 1 and 2 real estate”).

B. On February 2, 2017, the Plaintiff sent a written peremptory notice to the Defendants to the effect that “The Plaintiff shall urge the Defendants to reply in writing within two months from the date of receipt of the written peremptory notice, and if there is no reply, it shall be deemed that the Plaintiff did not consent to the establishment of the association, and shall exercise the right to demand sale under Article 39 of the former Act and Article 48 of the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter “the Act”) (hereinafter “the instant peremptory notice”).

C. Although Defendant B received the instant written peremptory notice on February 3, 2017, it did not respond to whether he/she consented to the establishment of the association until two months passed thereafter, Defendant C had his/her domicile in a foreign country, and was unable to receive the said written peremptory notice for reasons of the absence of a closed door.

On May 30, 2017, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendants on May 30, 2017, and expressed a wish to exercise the claim for sale in accordance with relevant statutes, including Article 39 of the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions (No. 4, 5).

The duplicate of the instant complaint was served on June 12, 2017 to Defendant B, and on January 24, 2018 to Defendant C, respectively, and Defendant C.