1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B: The real estate listed in the annexed sheet No. 1;

B. Defendant C shall provide the real estate listed in the annex 2 list.

1. According to the statements in Gap evidence 1, 2, 3-2, and 4-6 against defendant C, the facts as shown in the separate sheet are recognized. Thus, the defendant C is obligated to deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet 2 to the plaintiff, except in special circumstances.

As to this, Defendant C asserted that the obligation of relocating the tenants to the Plaintiff Union is against the Plaintiff Union that appointed the law firm as its agent based on the partnership fees received from the members, including the above Defendant, and that the said Defendant did not have any way to enforce the migration of tenants.

However, the instant claim is seeking the delivery of real estate owned and possessed by the said Defendant, who is a member of the association (in the real estate listed in attached Table 2, the portion of 44 square meters in the ship connected in order to each point of 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 4, 1, 4, 4, 4, 1). It is not against the lessee who directly occupies real estate by concluding a lease agreement, etc. with the said Defendant.

Therefore, for the above reasons, the Plaintiff’s request for extradition cannot be avoided.

2. As to Defendant B and E

(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the attached Form;

(b) Judgment made by deeming confessions: Articles 208(3)2 and 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act;

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.