1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

3. Text of the judgment of the court of first instance;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 31, 2011, the Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and consolidation project association that has obtained authorization to establish a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project in the area of the Dong Government-si M in the Dong Government-si M.

B. On November 4, 2016, the Plaintiff obtained the authorization of the management and disposal plan for the said rearrangement project from the government market, and the said authorization was publicly notified on the same day.

C. The real estate stated in the attached list 7 is located in the above rearrangement zone, and the defendants occupy each real estate stated in the purport of the claim.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Gap evidence No. 5-7, and 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, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter “former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents”) provides that “When the head of a Si/Gun approves a management and disposal plan under paragraph (2), he/she shall publicly notify the details 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 under paragraph (3), the owner, owner, superficies, person holding a right, lease right, etc. of the previous land or building shall not use or benefit from the previous land or building by the date of

If a management and disposition plan is authorized and publicly announced pursuant to these statutory provisions, the former owner’s use and profit-making of the subject matter shall be suspended, so a project implementer may use and profit from the subject matter without any separate procedure of expropriation or use (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da28394, Nov. 24, 201). As seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s management and disposition plan was authorized and publicly announced on Nov. 4, 201, the Defendants whose use and profit-making has been suspended shall each own possession of the Plaintiff, the project implementer, as the Plaintiff,