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

B. Defendant C, D, and E are buildings listed in the attached Table 2.

A. The Plaintiff is an organization established to implement a housing redevelopment project (hereinafter “instant redevelopment project”) for the area of the area including each building listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2, including each building listed in the separate sheet No. 1 and 2, and obtained authorization of the management and disposal plan regarding the said redevelopment project from the Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan City Office on July 20, 2015, and the said authorization was publicly announced on July 29, 2015.

B. Defendant B is the owner, Defendant C, D, and E of the buildings listed in the separate sheet No. 1 list, each of the 1/6 equity holders of the buildings listed in the separate sheet No. 2 list, and is not subject to cash settlement that did not apply for parcelling-out within the period for application

C. The Plaintiff filed an application for adjudication of expropriation with the Busan Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee, which did not consult with the Defendants, and the said Expropriation Committee rendered a ruling of expropriation on May 4, 2017 with respect to each building, etc. listed in attached Tables 1 and 2 on February 20, 2017.

According to the above ruling of expropriation, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 245,105,830 as the Busan District Court No. 1918 of 2017 with the deposited person as Defendant B on March 24, 2017, and KRW 622,152,890 as the deposited person under the Busan District Court No. 3094 of 2017 with the deposited person as Defendant C on April 27, 2017 with the deposited person as Defendant C on May 1, 2017 with the deposited person as Defendant D on May 1, 2017 with the Busan District Court No. 3194 of 22,152,890,890, and the deposited person as Defendant E on March 28, 2017 with the deposited person as Defendant E in the Busan District Court No. 2018 of 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including branch numbers in case of additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In the instant case where the Plaintiff seeks to deliver a building against the Defendants pursuant to Article 49(6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), Defendant D and E do not occupy the building listed in the currently annexed Table 2, and thus, the instant lawsuit against the Defendants is without standing.