1. Of the buildings listed in the list of real estate attached to the Plaintiff, the Defendant indicated in attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. In order to construct a new office building, the Plaintiff is a project implementer that promotes D business ‘D business' (hereinafter “instant business’), which is an urban planning facility business under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”), in Seoul Special Metropolitan City C Day.

B. On July 13, 2017, the Plaintiff publicly announced an implementation plan pursuant to Article 88 of the National Land Planning Act after publicly announced the urban planning facilities (public office buildings and roads) and topographical drawings in the F District Planning Zone “E publicly announced by the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seoul.” On December 13, 2017, the Plaintiff announced the implementation plan pursuant to Article 91 of the National Land Planning Act on December 20, 2018 (Seoul Special Metropolitan City A public notification G).

The Plaintiff consulted with the owner, etc. to expropriate the land to be incorporated in the instant project and transfer the goods, but did not reach an agreement, applied for adjudication on expropriation to the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Local Land Expropriation Committee.

(d)

The Seoul H land (hereinafter “the instant land”) and its ground buildings (hereinafter “the instant building”) located within the instant project zone were owned by I. On February 28, 2020, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Local Land Expropriation Committee decided to expropriate a group of real estate, including the instant land and buildings on April 17, 2020 (hereinafter “instant expropriation adjudication”), and the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership on May 20, 2020.

E. As of the closing date of pleadings of the instant case, the Defendant possessed the part indicated in the text of the instant building.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The instant project implemented by the Plaintiff to determine the cause of the claim is an urban planning facility project that is necessary for the project pursuant to Article 95 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act. In such cases, the project is a public project pursuant to Article 96 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act.