The defendants receive money from the plaintiff as stated in the separate sheet No. 1.

The plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and improvement project association established on August 12, 2010 in accordance with the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter referred to as the "Urban Improvement Act") to implement a housing reconstruction project implemented by the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government J as a rearrangement zone.

The Defendants were members of the Plaintiff, who owned and occupied each of the instant real estate located in the above rearrangement zone.

On December 7, 2011, the Plaintiff received an authorization for project implementation from the head of Dongjak-gu and received notification and public announcement procedures for application for parcelling-out under Article 46 (1) of the Urban Improvement Act from the members of the Association from January 15, 2012 to March 14, 2012, but the Defendants did not apply for parcelling-out during the above period.

A copy of the complaint of this case, stating the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to exercise the right to demand sale of each of the instant real estate against the Defendants, was served to the Defendants around August 2014.

[Grounds for recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including a branch number), and the facts of recognition as to the purport of the whole pleadings, the defendants lose their membership under Article 47 of the Act on the Maintenance of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents because they did not apply for the sale within the period for application for parcelling-out and became a person subject to cash liquidation. As the plaintiff exercised the right to demand sale to the defendants who became a person subject to cash liquidation, it shall be deemed that the sales contract for each real estate of this case was concluded on March 15, 2012, the following day after the expiration of the period for application for parcelling-out between the plaintiff and the defendants (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da73215, Dec. 23, 2010). The defendants are obligated to transfer each real estate of this case to the plaintiff on March 15, 2012.

The defendants' defenses and judgments thereon.