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

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"), the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the establishment of a housing redevelopment improvement project (hereinafter referred to as the "project in this case") on October 9, 2009 for the housing redevelopment project for the Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 49,240 square meters, and obtained authorization from the head of Seongdong-gu. On December 21, 201, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the implementation from the head of Seongdong-gu pursuant to Article 28 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, and obtained authorization for the implementation of a management and disposal plan on February 27, 2014 pursuant to Articles 48 and 49(2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, and

Defendant B is currently possessing at present by leasing the whole of the real estate on the attached list, which belongs to the site of the instant project.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1, 2, 3, 4-2 and the purport of the whole pleadings.

The housing redevelopment project implementer shall remove the existing structures after receiving the approval of the management plan (Article 48-2 of the Urban Improvement Act), and when the approval of the management plan is publicly notified, the right holder such as the owner, superficies, leaseer, etc. of the previous land or structure shall not use or benefit from the existing land or structure until the date of public announcement of transfer under Article 54 of the Urban Improvement Act.

(Article 49(6) main text of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas. According to the above facts, the defendant, who is the lessee, shall leave the building in possession of the lessee from the building indicated in the attached list. Thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver all the real estate in the attached list to the plaintiff.

The defendant's assertion has no obligation to deliver the above building before receiving legitimate business compensation, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant is a person eligible for business compensation, and the above defense cannot be accepted.

Thus, the plaintiff's claim is justified.