The Defendant: (a) KRW 101,125,502 to Plaintiff A; (b) KRW 63,261,146 to Plaintiff B; (c) KRW 52,812,223 to Plaintiff C; and (d) KRW 73,248 to Plaintiff D.

The basic facts are the cooperatives established on September 22, 2009 for implementing the business of improving the Icheon-gu, Gwangju (hereinafter “instant improvement business”) in accordance with the Urban Improvement Act, including the contract between the defendant and H.

On February 23, 2007, H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”) entered into a contract on the formulation of a rearrangement plan and the designation of a rearrangement zone (hereinafter “urban planning contract”) with the Defendant’s promotion committee to provide services, such as a decision to revise an urban management plan and a proposal to designate an improvement zone. Around the same time, he entered into a contract on administrative services such as the formulation of an improvement plan, designation of an improvement zone, establishment of an association, etc. (hereinafter “administrative service contract”), and entered into an urban planning service contract and an administrative service contract (hereinafter “instant contract”).

In the urban planning service contract, the amount calculated by multiplying the total floor area of construction on the project plan formulated at the time of designating a rearrangement zone by the usual price of 4,000 won is determined as the service price, and in the administrative service contract, the total floor area determined as the project implementation authorization by the usual price of 21,00 won is determined as the service price, but the calculation of the service price before the project implementation authorization is granted shall be based on the total floor area of construction on the project plan

H performed all the services specified in the urban planning service contract (the relevant service fee is KRW 527,969,172), and 35% of the services specified in the administrative service contract (the notice of the decision of designation of the rearrangement zone, 15% of the decision of the designation of the rearrangement zone, and 20% of the establishment of the association).

(2) Around September 30, 2009, H lent KRW 217,855,00 to the Defendant by September 30, 2009, the service cost under the urban planning service contract is “urban planning cost” and the service cost under the administrative service contract is “administrative service cost” and “service cost” in general.

(hereinafter “Loan Claim”). Meanwhile, on June 27, 2009, it is an agenda item No. 3 at the Defendant’s inaugural general meeting.