건물명도
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The reasons for the conclusion of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case are as follows: “The defendant is obligated to deliver each of the grounds for the claim of this case to the court of first instance “(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Da3523, Nov. 24, 2006; 2006Da35223, Apr. 27, 2015; 2006; 206Da3523, Apr. 27, 2015; 2006; 206Da3523, Apr. 27, 2015; 2006). The defendant’s amendment of the above grounds for the claim to seek delivery of the building of this case pursuant to the authorization and public notice of the management and disposal plan of this case to seek delivery of the building of this case to the above building pursuant to the authorization and disposal plan of this case. The above amendment of the grounds for the claim is unlawful as the lack of identity of the basic basis for the claim.
2. In addition, the defendant added "the following, the plan to modify the management and disposal of this case was made by omitting the estimated amount of the site or building scheduled for parcelling-out, the estimated amount of the improvement project cost, and the subsequent notification by the document on the size of the partnership members and the timing of sharing the burden," as stated in Article 48 (1) of the Urban Improvement Act.