A. Defendant B: (a) the buildings listed in paragraph 1 of the attached list;

B. Defendant D and E are listed in paragraph 5 of the attached Table.

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association that has been established with the total area of 87,025 square meters in Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as a project implementation district.

B. Defendant B is the owner of the building listed in the attached Table No. 1, and Defendant D and E are the owners of the buildings listed in the attached Table No. 5 of the attached Table No. 5, and each of the above buildings is located within the above improvement project implementation zone, and Defendant B, D and E occupy each of the above buildings as a cash liquidation agent who did not apply for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling

C. On July 8, 2016, a management and disposal plan for the said rearrangement project was approved pursuant to Article 49(2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), and was publicly notified pursuant to Article 49(3) of the same Act and Article 13 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act.

The Plaintiff deposited KRW 428,79,850 for Defendant B, Defendant D and E, respectively, on February 9, 2017, after receiving a ruling of expropriation for each of the above buildings by the local Land Tribunal of Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

E. On October 16, 2017, the Plaintiff additionally deposited KRW 15,400,238 in the aggregate of KRW 12,00,000,00,00 for settlement money for resettlement, KRW 2,623,08, and KRW 77,230 for movable property transfer.

[Ground of Recognition] Defendant B and C: The absence of dispute, each entry in Gap evidence 1 through 12 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings, defendant D and E: deemed confession (Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B, D, and E

A. According to Article 49(6) of the Urban Improvement Act, when a management and disposal plan is authorized and the notice is made, a right holder, such as the owner of the previous land, structure, etc., can not use or profit from the previous land or structure until the date of the public announcement of relocation under Article 54 of the Urban Improvement Act, and the project implementer can use or profit from the former land or structure. Thus, the plaintiff, who is the project implementer, is authorized