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

A. The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and maintenance project association under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) that promotes a reconstruction project for multi-family housing and ancillary facilities on the site of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul Seoul Seoul Seoul Seoul Seoul Seoul Seoul Seoul House District, and the Defendant is the lessee of the real estate in the attached list of real estate located in the site of the reconstruction project (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. The Plaintiff received the authorization from the head of Gangnam-gu Office to establish an association on October 14, 2003, the authorization to implement the project on April 28, 2016, and the authorization to implement the management and disposal plan on April 6, 2018, respectively, and the head of Gangnam-gu notified the head of the management and disposal plan on April 13, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Article 81(1) of the Urban Improvement Act provides that "Any right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leaseer, etc. of the previous land or building, shall not use or benefit from the previous land or building until the date when the approval of the management and disposal plan is publicly notified pursuant to Article 78(4)." Thus, the Defendant, a lessee of the instant real estate, cannot use or benefit from the instant real estate, and the Plaintiff, a project developer, can use or benefit from the instant real estate.

Therefore, the defendant has a duty to deliver the real estate of this case possessed by the plaintiff.

B. As to this, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff's union members committed an illegal act, the plaintiff's error caused illness to the defendant, and the defendant should be compensated for damages or compensated for losses from the plaintiff.

Plaintiff’s members committed an illegal act.

There is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff’s mistake caused illness to the Defendant, and the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects is not applied or applied by analogy to general housing reconstruction projects.