2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On September 6, 2007, the Defendant is the implementer of the C Housing Site Development Project (hereinafter “instant project”) published as D Public Notice of Ulsan Metropolitan City on September 6, 2007, and the Plaintiff is the owner of the Ulsan Northern-gu B Housing Site Development Project (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On August 11, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a water compensation agreement with the Defendant for obstacles in KRW 672,980 regarding the instant building, and received the said compensation on May 19, 2009.

C. In early 2009, the Defendant established relocation measures for the implementation of the instant project pursuant to Article 78 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”).

According to this, from November 3, 2004, which was the date of public inspection of C, a person who owned and resided in a residential building from before the date of the compensation contract or the ruling of expropriation is a person subject to relocation measures.

On April 2, 2009, the defendant selected and notified the person subject to the relocation measures individually. By the end of June 2009, the defendant received explanatory materials from disqualified persons and objectors, examined them, and finally selected and confirmed the person subject to the relocation measures around July 2, 2009.

E. In the process of selecting a person subject to relocation measures, the Defendant conducted a field investigation on the building of this case, and as a result, judged that the building of this case was an abandoned house that does not live and did not select the Plaintiff as a person subject to relocation measures

F. On August 7, 2009, the Defendant publicly announced the supply of migrants’s housing site to apply for the parcelling-out of the housing site between September 7, 2009 and September 9, 2009, for those whose selection was determined as a person eligible for relocation measures.

G. Since then, the Plaintiff asserted that he was designated as a person subject to measures for resettlement, the Defendant was unable to live in the Plaintiff on February 13, 2017.