1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Basic Facts

Pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter referred to as the “Urban Improvement Act”), the Plaintiff was established to implement a housing reconstruction project (hereinafter referred to as the “instant project”). On June 12, 2003, the Plaintiff obtained authorization from the head of Songpa-gu under Article 28 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents. A project implementation authorization was obtained on December 26, 2013, and a management and disposal plan was approved pursuant to Articles 48 and 49(2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, and the head of Songpa-gu announced the management and disposal plan on January 27, 2015 in accordance with Article 49(3) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents.

On July 24, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with a national bank, Korea Exchange Bank, Nonghyup Bank, Nonghyup Bank, Korea Bank, Korea Bank, and Korea-Japan Bank on the loan financial business (A) of this case related to the instant business (Relocation Expenses) and agreed that the said bank will implement the said loan to the Plaintiff on the basis that the total amount of the loan is KRW 2 trillion 100 billion (each bank’s loan ratio is determined by the Plaintiff’s side).

In addition, around 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a business agreement with the Korean National Bank Co., Ltd. and Samsung C&T Co., Ltd. to provide loans to the Plaintiff within the limit of KRW 80 billion (A 10-1) in order to raise business funds necessary for the instant business.

Defendant B is the owner of A apartment Nos. 134 and 406 (hereinafter “406”) included in the instant project site, and Defendant C is the owner of A apartment Nos. 133 and 104 (hereinafter “104”).

According to the plaintiff's articles of incorporation, members shall leave the relevant building within the resettlement period that the plaintiff determines and notifies (Article 32 (4)), and members or tenants shall not leave the relevant house.