A. Defendant B indicated in the attached Table 1 list 3, 4, 5, 6, 3-3.

A. The Plaintiff is an association established for a housing redevelopment improvement project with the size of 43,329 square meters in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as a project implementation district. The Plaintiff obtained authorization from the head of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on September 17, 2008, and obtained authorization for the implementation of the project on September 5, 2013, and obtained authorization for the implementation of the project on September 13, 2013. On November 13, 2014, the management and disposal plan was approved pursuant to Article 49(2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement

B. The Defendants are tenants who leased and use and benefit from each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet located in the project implementation district.

C. When a public notice of an administrative disposition plan under Article 49(3) of the Urban Improvement Act is given, the use and profit-making by the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, persons having superficies, leasers, etc. against the previous land or buildings shall be suspended pursuant to Article 49(6) of the same Act, and the project implementer may use and profit from the former land or buildings (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 91Da22094, Dec. 22, 1992; Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to deliver the pertinent real estate possessed as stated in the order to the Plaintiff

2. Claims against Defendant C, E, or H: Decision by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act).

3. Claim against Defendant B, D, F, G, I, J, and K: Judgment of deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act);