1. The plaintiffs' appeal and the claim for compensation for commercial buildings added at the trial.

Basic Facts

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is that the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance in addition to the following parts. Thus, this Court’s explanation is cited by the main sentence of Article 420

The "921.651 square meters" in the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be divided into "91.651 square meters".

On the other hand, the pre-existing floor area ratio of the commercial building of this case was 193.45%, and as the floor area ratio of the commercial building of this case increased to 246.59%, the pre-existing floor area ratio of the commercial building of this case between the commercial building of this case and the commercial building of this case was increased to 193.45%, the pre-existing floor area ratio of the commercial building of this case shall be 95.01 square meters increased to the residential part."

Nos. 10, 13, and 14 of the text of the judgment of the court of first instance are written with the fact that there is no dispute (based on recognition), Gap evidence 1 through Gap evidence 16, Eul evidence 19, and the result of a reply to fact inquiry by the head of Songpa-gu court of first instance to the head of Songpa-gu, July 17, 2014, and the purport of the whole pleadings".

As the floor area ratio has increased to 246.59% with respect to the land size of the instant commercial building, the Defendant Union and the instant commercial building association agreed to transfer the land size of the newly constructed commercial building to an apartment unit, and to compensate the instant commercial building members for the said transferred portion in money. The instant compensation for the commercial building is the amount that the instant commercial building owners transferred part of 131.92 square meters of the land size from the beginning of the year to the apartment site and was paid in return for the transfer of some of the land size of the building site owned by the instant commercial building to the apartment site.

After all, this constitutes the appraised value of the existing commercial site owned by the owner of the commercial building in this case from the beginning, that is, the value of the previous property.

Therefore, the defendant union is part of the cash settlement money based on Article 47 of the Do administration Act to the plaintiffs, who are the owners of the commercial building of this case.