1. The defendant shall receive KRW 399,453,040 from the plaintiff, and at the same time real estate stated in the separate sheet to the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), the Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and rearrangement project association established for the purpose of implementing a housing reconstruction and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”) with the content of removing old and inferior existing buildings located within the area of 59,673.80 square meters (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”) of Daegu-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Seoul Special Metropolitan City Seoul Special Metropolitan City pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).

On October 28, 2016, the Plaintiff obtained authorization to establish an association from the head of Daegu Metropolitan City, the head of the Gu and completed the establishment registration on October 31, 2016.

B. The Defendant is the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet in the improvement zone of this case (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) and did not consent to the establishment of the association.

C. On January 26, 2017, February 21, 2017, and March 10, 2017, the Plaintiff sent a peremptory notice to the Defendant stating that “In the absence of reply within the said period, the Plaintiff shall make a written reply within two months from the date of receipt of the peremptory notice to determine the consent to establish an association under the Urban Improvement Act, and if no reply is made within the said period, the Plaintiff shall be deemed to have no consent to establish an association under the said Act and shall make a claim for sale of real estate under the amount of appraisal and assessment on which he/she owns.” However, the Plaintiff was not served on the Defendant due to the absence of closure.

The Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the reply to whether he/she will participate in the instant rearrangement project, and the Defendant was served with a complaint on May 22, 2017, but did not reply within two months from that time.

E. Meanwhile, the market price of each of the instant real estate as of July 23, 2017, on the day following the expiration of the maximum period of two months from the date of delivery of a complaint, including development gains, is 39,453,040 won.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7 has each number.