1. The Defendants deliver to the Plaintiff the real estate indicated in the attached list.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association established to implement a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”) with the area of 35,740 square meters in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si.

B. On March 21, 2017, the Plaintiff received a management and disposal plan from the Suwon Market on March 21, 2017, and the Suwon Market publicly announced the management and disposal plan on the same day.

C. The real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) is located within the project zone for the instant rearrangement project.

The Defendants occupy the immovables as the lessee of the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1-4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Article 49(3) of the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (wholly amended by Act No. 14567; hereinafter “former Act”) provides that “the head of Si/Gun shall, when he approves a management and disposal plan pursuant to paragraph (2), publish the contents thereof in the official bulletin of the relevant local government.” The main sentence of Article 49(6) provides that “When a public announcement is made pursuant to paragraph (3), the owner of the previous land or building, superficies, leaser, etc. shall not use or benefit from the previous land or building until the date of public announcement of transfer under Article 54.”

In this case, the fact that the Health Unit and Suwon Market publicly announced the management and disposal plan concerning the instant rearrangement project is as seen earlier. As such, the Defendants, the lessee of the instant real estate located within the business zone for the instant rearrangement project, were unable to use or profit from the instant real estate pursuant to the main sentence of Article 49(6) of the former Act.

Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, who is the implementer of the instant improvement project.

3. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants is justifiable.