1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an association established for the purpose of housing redevelopment project, the project district of which is 71,106,30 square meters of the FF in Changwon-si, Changwon-si, which is the project district, with the approval for the establishment of a housing redevelopment project, on January 10, 201 from the Changwon-si, the authorization for the implementation of the project on January 18, 201, the authorization for the implementation of the project on January 18, 2013, and the authorization for the management and disposal plan on January 23, 2014, and the Changwon-si announced the above management and disposal

B. The Defendant is a person subject to cash liquidation who did not apply for parcelling-out to the Plaintiff while owning and occupying real estate in the attached Table 1 list located in the project implementation district of the said housing redevelopment improvement project (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

C. On April 28, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for adjudication of expropriation with the competent local Land Expropriation Committee (hereinafter “instant adjudication”) in order to not reach an agreement with the Defendant on the compensation for the instant real estate, and on June 17, 2015, the said Committee deposited the full amount of compensation for losses determined in the instant adjudication for the Defendant on May 27, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Gap evidence Nos. 5 and 6, Gap evidence Nos. 8-4 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The plaintiff's assertion was made by the delivery and removal of the real estate of this case through the execution of the judgment of the court of first instance. The defendant asserts to the purport that the defendant's appeal is unlawful, since it is not possible to recover possession of the real estate of this case.

B. There is no dispute between the parties on the fact that a provisional execution on the instant real estate was executed based on a provisional execution based on the judgment of the first instance court.

However, the effect of enforcement based on the judgment of the sentence of provisional execution is not fixed, but is a condition to cancel or change the subsequent judgment of the main body or the sentence of provisional execution.