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

3...

A. On December 8, 2015, the Plaintiff implemented a public housing construction project for B, including each land listed in the separate sheet, for the relevant area. On December 8, 2015, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership of D-1/2 shares among the land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”). On December 28, 2016, the Plaintiff paid C, as compensation, KRW 17,161,00,00 in total, and KRW 27,386,650 in total, on December 28, 2018, as compensation, for each obstacle, including the plastic houses listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant plastic greenhouse”).

B. The defendant currently occupies each of the instant plastic houses.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts, even though the Plaintiff completed the compensation procedure for the instant vinyl to the Defendant on December 28, 2018, the Defendant violated the Plaintiff’s ownership regarding the instant land while continuously occupying and using the instant vinyl. As such, the Plaintiff is obligated to deliver the instant vinyl to the Plaintiff.

B. As to this, the Defendant asserted to the effect that he cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim until he receives adequate compensation, relocation measures, and life countermeasures.

On the other hand, the issue of whether the defendant is a person eligible for compensation must be disputed through administrative litigation, which is separate from the case, and even if the case can be contested in domestic affairs, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant is a person eligible for compensation, and the above argument by the defendant is rejected.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.