건물명도
1. Defendant E shall deliver to the Plaintiff the real estate listed in the attached Table 5 list.
2. The plaintiff's defendant B, C, D, and F
1. On February 17, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim against Defendant E with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Seoul Special Metropolitan City G G G 80,836 square meters as a project implementation district, and the management and disposal plan was approved on February 17, 2015 and announced on the same day.
Defendant E possessed as the owner of the real estate listed in the attached Table 5 located in the project implementation district of this case, and did not file an application for parcelling-out.
Pursuant to the main sentence of Article 49 (6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, the plaintiff's claim against defendant E is reasonable.
b. Claim against Defendant B, C, D, and F
A. In fact-finding, the Plaintiff is a Housing Redevelopment Project Association established with the area of project of 80,836§³ G in Seoul Special Metropolitan City as a project implementation district.
The Plaintiff obtained authorization from the head of Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City for the implementation of the project on November 12, 2009, the authorization for the implementation of the project on May 22, 2014, and the authorization for the management and disposal plan on February 17, 2015 under Article 49 (2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter referred to as
The head of Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City publicly announced a management and disposal plan on February 17, 2015 pursuant to Article 49 (3) of the Urban Improvement Act.
Defendant B real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1; Defendant C real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2; Defendant D real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 3 and No. 4; Defendant F occupies real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 6 as each owner.
Each of the above real estate is a real estate located in the project implementation district of this case, and the defendant B, C, D, and F are subject to cash settlement because they did not apply for parcelling-out.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Gap evidence 4-1 to 5, 9, Gap evidence 5-1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
(b) Article 49 (6) of the Act on the Determination of Urban Improvement shall be applied to the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leaseer, etc. of the previous land or building when a public announcement is made under paragraph (3).