(a) Defendant B and C are buildings listed in the annexed sheet No. 1;

B. Defendant D shall be the building listed in the attached Table 2 list.

A. On February 26, 2009, the Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and consolidation project association that has obtained authorization to establish an association under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) with the area of project with the land size of 153,501 square meters from the head of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

B. Defendant B and C are co-owners of the buildings listed in the separate sheet No. 1, and Defendant D are owners of the buildings listed in the separate sheet No. 2, and Defendant E, F, G, and H occupy each building as tenants of each building listed in the separate sheet No. 3, respectively, and the said real estate is located in the project implementation district.

C. The head of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government announced the project implementation authorization on June 20, 2013 to the Plaintiff, and announced the project implementation authorization on September 25, 2014 and January 22, 2015. On February 24, 2017, the head of Seongbuk-gu publicly announced the project implementation authorization on the management and disposition plan (hereinafter “instant management and disposition plan”), and publicly announced on March 2, 2017.

On August 25, 2017, the local Land Tribunal of Seoul Special Metropolitan City rendered a ruling of expropriation on October 20, 2017 with the date of commencement of expropriation as of October 20, 2017. On October 19, 2017, the Plaintiff deposited additional charges for delay in addition to the compensation for losses under the above ruling of expropriation on October 19, 2017, which is the date of commencement of expropriation.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts not clearly disputed, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. When a public notice of a management and disposal plan under Article 49(3) of the Act on the Determination of Grounds for Claim is given, the use and profit-making by the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leasee, leasee, etc. of the previous land or buildings shall be suspended pursuant to Article 49(6) of the same Act, and the project implementer may use and profit from the former land or buildings (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 91Da22094, Dec. 22, 1992; Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Therefore, the Plaintiff who acquired the right to use and profit in accordance with the public notice of