A. During Ansan-si, the Plaintiff is an association that has obtained authorization for the establishment of a housing redevelopment project on February 21, 2012 under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) for the purpose of implementing a housing redevelopment project on the housing scale of 116,66.10 square meters in Ansan-si, and obtained authorization for the implementation of a housing redevelopment project on January 15, 2016 (hereinafter “instant redevelopment project”), and obtained authorization for the implementation of a housing redevelopment project on February 27, 2017, and was publicly notified of the management and disposal plan on the same day.

B. The Defendants possess each of the relevant real estate listed in the separate sheet within the instant redevelopment project zone.

[Ground of Recognition] Defendant B, C, and E: The absence of dispute, each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings, Defendant D: The judgment of deemed confession (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The main text of Article 49(6) of the Urban Improvement Act provides, “When the authorization of the management and disposition plan is publicly announced, any right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leasee, leasee, etc. of the previous land or building, shall not use or profit from the previous land or building until the date the previous public announcement is made pursuant to Article 86.” Thus, when the approval of the management and disposition plan is publicly notified, the use or profit of the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leasee, etc. of the previous land or building, shall be suspended, and the project implementer may use or benefit from the former land or building (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Therefore, the Defendants whose use or benefit has been suspended pursuant

B. Defendant B, C, and E’s assertion and determination to the effect that the Plaintiff could not respond to the Plaintiff’s claim for delivery of the building since the Plaintiff did not have paid compensation for losses to the Defendants.