A. Defendant B shall draw up the attached Form No. 1 floor of the real estate listed in the attached list

1.Each of the indications 2, 5, 6, 3, 2.

A. Under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), the Plaintiff is a cooperative that completed the registration of incorporation on October 13, 2010 with the authorization of establishment on October 4, 2010 in order to implement a housing redevelopment improvement project (hereinafter “instant improvement project”) within the Michuhol-gu Incheon Metropolitan City E (129,599 square meters (hereinafter “instant project area”).

B. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet is within the instant project zone, and Defendant B occupies the “F” indicated in the separate sheet 1, and Defendant C and D occupy the “G” indicated in the separate sheet 1.

C. On August 8, 2016, the head of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City publicly announced the authorization for the implementation of the instant rearrangement project, and on June 19, 2017, approved the management and disposal plan on the instant rearrangement project, and publicly notified it on the same day (hereinafter “instant public notice”).

The Plaintiff filed an application for adjudication of expropriation because it did not consult with the Defendants on the compensation for losses, and received a ruling of expropriation from the Incheon Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal on November 28, 2018 (the date of commencement of expropriation on January 22, 2019).

The Plaintiff deposited the full amount of compensation under the above acceptance ruling with the Defendants.

[Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap's entries in Gap's Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 7 through 9, 13, 14, 16, 19 through 21 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the main sentence of Article 81(1) of the Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions, when a management and disposal plan is authorized and publicly notified, the use and profit-making by the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leaseer, etc. of the previous land or structure, shall be suspended, and the project implementer may use and profit from such plan (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff is the project implementer for whom the public notice of approval of the management and disposal plan was