1. The plaintiff, and the defendant B indicated in the attached Table 3 list 1 to 4 and 1 among the real estate 1 floors listed in the attached Table 3 list.

1. The facts in the separate sheet on the plaintiff's cause of claim do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the whole purport of the pleadings as stated in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including additional numbers). Thus, the defendants are obligated to deliver to the plaintiff each real estate owned and occupied by the plaintiff within the plaintiff's business area.

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. Defendant B asserted that the claim of the Plaintiff cannot be complied with before receiving the compensation for the transfer cost, but the transfer cost is entitled to the claim of the said Defendant.

In light of the fact that the purpose of recognition is not to compensate for the loss suffered by the owner due to the implementation of the project, but to be paid in the social security level, the obligation to pay is a preferential performance relationship than the obligation to deliver the building of the above defendant.

Therefore, the above defendant's above assertion is without merit, since it cannot be seen as having a simultaneous performance relationship.

C. Defendant G alleged that the amount of compensation determined in the process of the adjudication on expropriation is too small and that it cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim, but the above reasons alone cannot be asserted against the Plaintiff’s request for extradition. Therefore, the above assertion is without merit.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted for all reasons, and it is so decided as per Disposition.