2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On December 19, 2006, the Defendant is designated and publicly announced as the project implementer of a housing redevelopment improvement project (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”) whose project implementation district consisting of a housing redevelopment project district consisting of a total of 257,590 square meters from the Gyeyang-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Ansan-si, Ansan-si. The Defendant is the project implementer who was authorized to implement the project on December 31, 2008, and the Plaintiff is the owner of the building located within the instant rearrangement project district.

B. The defendant set the period from January 20, 2009 to August 25, 2009 for the application for parcelling-out of the rearrangement project in this case, and received the application for parcelling-out from the owners of land and buildings within the rearrangement project zone in this case. The plaintiff made an application for parcelling-out of multi-family housing with an exclusive area of 114 square meters for the defendant within the above application period for parcelling-out.

C. On November 25, 2011, the Defendant obtained approval of the instant management and disposition plan for the instant rearrangement project from the Ansan market (hereinafter “instant management and disposition plan”), and the Plaintiff became a seller in accordance with the instant management and disposition plan.

On May 12, 2014, the Defendant informed the buyers of the conclusion of the contract by setting the contract period from June 23 to July 4, 2014, but the Plaintiff did not conclude the contract for sale.

E. On June 22, 2016, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a written notice stating that the Plaintiff would be informed of whether the Plaintiff would move in or wish to liquidate cash, by June 28, 2016, to the Plaintiff’s former resident registration number, the Defendant returned the written notice to the addressee’s unknown despite having sent the written notice to the Plaintiff as D apartment and E, which is the Plaintiff’s former resident registration address. The employee in charge of the Defendant sent a telephone conversation with the Plaintiff on June 24, 2016, and the Plaintiff visited the Defendant’s office on June 27, 2016.

F. On October 24, 2016, the Defendant amended the instant management and disposition plan to exclude two persons who filed an application for cash settlement from persons subject to parcelling-out, among those who did not conclude a contract for parcelling-out, and obtained an amendment to the management and disposition plan from the Ansan market.

(g)...