건물인도
1. The defendant shall display the annexed drawings to the plaintiff among the first floor of the real estate stated in the annexed list, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 1 respectively.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a cooperative established on July 24, 200 by obtaining authorization for the establishment on July 24, 2009 to implement the A-Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project (hereinafter “instant redevelopment Project”) under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) with the area of 16,142 square meters in Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-si, Nowon-gu. The Plaintiff is a lessee who leases part 32 square meters in the inside portion (hereinafter “instant building”) connected each point in sequence with each other in the area of the instant redevelopment project.
B. On February 9, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) obtained authorization to implement the instant redevelopment project on February 9, 2015; (b) obtained authorization to implement the relevant redevelopment project on December 30, 2015; and (c) publicly notified the authorization to implement the relevant redevelopment project on December 30, 2015; and (d) on December 30, 20
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 4 (including tentative number), the purport of whole pleading
2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, the Defendant, who is a lessee, is not able to use or profit from the instant building pursuant to the main sentence of Article 49(6) of the Urban Improvement Act by approving and publicly announcing the management and disposal plan of the instant redevelopment project applied by the Plaintiff on December 30, 2015, and thus, barring any special circumstance, is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, who is the project developer.
3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The defendant's summary of the defendant's assertion asserts that the plaintiff's claim of this case is improper for the following reasons.
1) The Defendant, as a lessee of the instant building, is the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Public Works Act”).
(2) The owner of the instant building, who was not compensated for the director fee under Article 55(2) of the Enforcement Rule, shall be subject to cash settlement.