1. The Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff the buildings and obstacles indicated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the Plaintiff obtained authorization of an implementation plan for an urban planning facility project as the implementer of the urban planning facility project pursuant to Article 86 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act for Suwon City Urban Planning Facility Project; the head of the Suwon Urban Planning Project publicly announced this pursuant to Article 91 of the same Act; the Plaintiff consulted with the Defendant to acquire the buildings and obstacles (hereinafter “subject matter of this case”) as indicated in the separate sheet owned by the Defendant, but failed to reach an agreement on the amount of compensation; on February 6, 2012, the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Tribunal decided to expropriate the subject matter of this case on March 6, 2012 by the Plaintiff’s application for adjudication; and on February 28, 2012, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 336,500,850, including compensation for the subject matter of this case as of February 28, 2012, with deposit money deposited by the Defendant as the Defendant under the jurisdiction of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Court.

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff deposited the compensation for losses as prescribed by the above expropriation ruling prior to the date of commencement of expropriation, and acquired ownership of the subject matter of this case on March 6, 2012, which is the date of commencement of expropriation. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the subject matter of this case to the Plaintiff under Article 43 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc.

B. The defendant asserts that he cannot respond to the claim for extradition before receiving adequate compensation, but as seen above, the local Land Tribunal's ruling of expropriation was made and the project operator deposited the compensation before the commencement date of expropriation, the defendant raised an objection to the purport that the Central Land Tribunal seeks an increase in the compensation for losses, or litigation was conducted.