The first instance judgment is revoked, and the case is remanded to the Seoul Administrative Court.

1. The main sentence of Article 57 (1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) provides that “In case where there is a difference between the price of land or building previously owned by a person who has purchased a building site or building and the price of the site or building that has been sold in lots, the project implementer shall collect or pay an amount equivalent to the difference (hereinafter “settlement money”) from a person who has purchased a building in lots after the announcement of relocation under Article 54 (2).” Article 58 (1) provides that “In case where a person who has paid settlement money fails to pay it, a project implementer who is the head of a Si/Gun may collect it (including collection in installments) in the same manner as delinquent local taxes are collected, and the project implementer who is not the head of a Si/Gun may entrust the head of Si/Gun

In addition, Article 61 (1) provides that "a project implementer who is not the head of a Si/Gun may impose and collect the difference between the costs under Article 60 (1) and revenues accrued in the course of implementing a rearrangement project as the dues," and Article 61 (4) provides that "a project implementer who is not the head of a Si/Gun may entrust the imposition and collection thereof to the head of a Si/Gun when any person fails to pay the dues or arrears." In the case where the head of a Si/Gun is entrusted with the imposition and collection under paragraph (4), he may impose and collect them in the same manner as delinquent local taxes are collected. In this case, the project implementer shall grant an amount equivalent to 4/

As such, the collection of liquidation money and dues under Articles 57(1) and 61(1) of the Urban Improvement Act shall be made.