The Plaintiff is an association established to implement a housing redevelopment improvement project (hereinafter referred to as the “instant improvement project”) by setting the area of 69,774.7m2 in Busan Seo-gu D (hereinafter referred to as “instant project area”) as the business area (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”).

On September 13, 2005, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the establishment of the head of Busan District Office, and obtained authorization for the project implementation on July 7, 2006. On August 14, 2019, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the management and disposition plan concerning the instant improvement project from the head of Busan District Office.

On August 21, 2019, the head of Busan Sari-gu announced the management and disposal plan.

Defendant B is the owner of the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 located in the instant project zone, and Defendant C is the owner of the real estate listed in the attached Table 2 located in the same zone and is subject to cash clearing.

[Ground] Fact-finding without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 10, and determination of the overall purport of arguments as to the cause of claim against the owner of the land or building in the rearrangement zone as a whole pursuant to Article 81 (1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), a right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leaseer, etc. of the previous land or building, shall not use or profit from the previous land or building until the date of the public announcement of transfer under Article 86, and the project implementer shall be allowed to use or profit from the previous land or building until the date of public announcement of the management and disposal plan (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Accordingly, if the public announcement of the management and disposal plan is made, the project implementer may

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da62561, 62578, Jul. 24, 2014). Examining the aforementioned facts in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine, the Defendants, the owners of each real estate listed in the separate sheet, barring any special circumstance.