2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3.Paragraph 1.

A. On January 27, 2015, Songpa-gu approved a management and disposal plan for A Apartment Housing Reconstruction Project pursuant to Article 49(2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents at the request of the Plaintiff on December 22, 2014, and publicly notified the content thereof on January 29, 2015, and the main contents thereof are as follows: < Amended by Act No. 13183, Jan

1. Project operator: The name of the project subject to the authorization of Plaintiff 2) : The location of the A apartment reconstruction project B: the planned area of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C (Dwon): 405,782.4m2

B. As of the date of closing argument of this case, the Defendant, who is the Plaintiff’s partner, owns and occupies the attached real estate in the land for the reconstruction project.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 9-1, 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to Article 49(3) and (6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, when a management and disposal plan is approved pursuant to Article 49(2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents and its contents are publicly announced in the official report of the local government that approved the plan, the owner of the previous land or structure cannot use or profit from the previous land or structure until the date of public announcement of relocation under Article 54 of the same Act

As seen earlier, since the management and disposal plan was authorized and publicly announced as to the instant case, the Defendant, the owner, is obligated to deliver the real estate stated in the attached Form to the Plaintiff as the project implementer

B. Judgment on the Defendant’s argument 1) The Defendant is the Plaintiff’s member of the Commercial Building Council inside the Plaintiff (the Defendant is the member of the Commercial Building Council).

In spite of the agreement to promote reconstruction in accordance with the independent settlement method for commercial areas, the substance of the commercial council itself is denied and only the delivery of the said real estate is denied.