1. The Defendant’s KRW 990,556 as well as its annual rate from July 7, 2018 to July 9, 2019, and the next day.

1. Basic facts

(a) Outline of the rearrangement project: The project implementer of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Seoul Metropolitan Government 90,559 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant rearrangement zone”): The public notice of approval for the implementation of the rearrangement project on January 12, 2009: The public notice of approval for the implementation of the rearrangement project on May 27, 2013: the date of approval for the implementation of the rearrangement project on January 23, 2017: the date of adjudication for expropriation on November 29, 2017: the date of commencement of expropriation on November 29, 2017: January 23, 2018.

(A) On September 18, 2004, the Plaintiff is the first floor house of the building of 2nd E in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City E in the instant improvement zone from D on September 18, 2004 (hereinafter “instant house”).

(B) On October 16, 2004, the Plaintiff: (a) transferred the resident registration of the instant house to the F building G in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City on September 26, 2005; (b) transferred the lease deposit to H on March 31, 2009; and (c) transferred the instant house again on July 12, 2013.

C) On October 16, 2004, the Plaintiff’s spouse I, his children J, and K were transferred to the instant house and maintained the resident registration even after the Plaintiff moved. C. The Defendant’s partial payment of the Defendant filed an application with the Defendant for the relocation cost of the instant house as a tenant. The Defendant paid KRW 13,473,00 on July 25, 2018 on the ground that the Plaintiff, other than the Plaintiff, had been transferred to the instant house after the public announcement of the said public inspection, paid KRW 13,473,00 for the relocation cost of the three-person household. The Defendant also paid the Plaintiff the director’s expenses on the same day. [In the same day, the Defendant did not have any dispute over the relevant facts, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 6, Eul’s evidence

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. On October 2004, the Plaintiff’s assertion continued to reside with the instant housing as well as the instant directors and their families for about 14 years until 2018. However, in order to avoid debt demand, only the Plaintiff transferred his/her resident registration address to a remote place for several years.

Therefore, even though the defendant should pay the plaintiff the cost of moving the residence of 4-person households, the defendant paid only the cost of moving the residence of 3-person households.