A. The Plaintiff was a project implementer who is implementing an urban environment improvement project (hereinafter “instant improvement project”) according to the method of implementation within the Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City E-won 4,661.2 square meters (hereinafter “instant improvement zone”) designated as a D zone through the public announcement of the determination of urban renewal acceleration plans.

In the rearrangement zone of this case, Defendant B owns the real estate listed in the [Attachment 1] No. 1; and Defendant C owns the real estate listed in the [Attachment 2] No. 2; and Defendant C owns the real estate listed in the [Attachment 2] No. 1 and 2, respectively (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”).

B. The Plaintiff obtained project implementation authorization from the Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office on December 28, 2015 pursuant to the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (Amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter “former Act”). The said authorization was publicly announced as Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G on the same day.

C. On January 26, 2018, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal rendered a ruling of expropriation on March 16, 2018 with respect to each of the instant real estate upon the Plaintiff’s request.

On February 22, 2018, the owners of land, etc. in the instant improvement zone decided to change the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor to the project implementer of the instant improvement project by holding an extraordinary general meeting, and accordingly, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor succeeded to the Plaintiff’s rights and duties related to the instant improvement project.

E. The Plaintiff’s successor intervenor is as above C.

On March 13, 2018, the court deposited KRW 933,101,200 as Defendant B, and KRW 250,1810,000 as Defendant C on March 14, 2018 with the deposited person as Defendant C, respectively.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry in Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including each number, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Article 38 of the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for the cause of the claim requires the project implementer to implement the rearrangement project within the rearrangement zone.