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

3...

A. The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and improvement project association established pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter referred to as the “Urban Improvement Act”) to implement the housing reconstruction improvement project (hereinafter referred to as the “maintenance Project”) within the Incheon-si C (hereinafter referred to as the “instant rearrangement zone”).

B. On April 5, 2006, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the establishment of a project from the astronomical mayor, and obtained authorization for the implementation plan on October 5, 2007, and obtained authorization for the implementation plan on March 15, 2017, and obtained approval for the implementation plan on December 11, 2017, and was publicly notified on December 11, 2017.

C. The Defendant is the owner and partner of the real estate indicated in the order within the instant rearrangement zone.

On March 27, 2017, the Plaintiff issued a notice for application for parcelling-out to the members for parcelling-out, setting the period from March 30, 2017 to April 28, 2017, and announced the application for parcelling-out on March 28, 2017. The Defendant received the above notice around that time and applied for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out.

【Ground for Recognition】 Each entry of Gap's 1 or 6 (including each number) without dispute

2. According to the main sentence of Article 81(1) of the Act on the Determination of Grounds for Claim, a right holder, such as the owner, lessee, etc. of the previous land or building, cannot use or profit from the previous land or building when the approval of the management and disposal plan under Article 78(3) of the same Act is publicly notified. Thus, according to the above recognition, the defendant is obligated to deliver each of the real estate stated in the order to the Plaintiff, who is the implementer

3. The defendant's assertion is notified of the outlined amount of contributions from the plaintiff, but this is not in accordance with the lawful and reasonable method, and it constitutes an error of important matters at the time of application for parcelling-out and thus the plaintiff's application for parcelling-out is revoked.