1. The Defendants shall withdraw the Plaintiff from the respective corresponding parts of the list of the buildings or obstacles attached to attached Table 1.

2...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an implementer of the instant urban development project by the association established for the purpose of implementing an urban development project to create a residential complex (hereinafter “instant urban development project”) on a scale of 436,898 square meters in accordance with the replotting method under the Urban Development Act. Defendant B is an owner or possessor of a building or an obstacle No. 1 and an obstacle No. 1 (hereinafter “instant building No. 1”) located within the instant urban development project zone. Defendant C is the owner or possessor of the instant building No. 1, etc., and Defendant D is the owner or possessor of the instant building or obstacle No. 3 as indicated in the [Attachment No. 1] list of buildings or obstacles (hereinafter “instant building No. 2, etc.”).

B. The Plaintiff obtained authorization of an implementation plan from the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do on April 1, 2010 for the instant urban development project and obtained authorization for a land substitution plan from the head of Pyeongtaek-si on March 12, 2014.

On March 28, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) designated and publicly announced land reserved for replotting, and designated the effective date of the designation of land reserved for replotting as April 29, 2014; and (b) notified the Defendants, who were former landowners and interested parties, that they are unable to use or benefit from the previous land pursuant to Articles 36 and 37 of the Urban Development Act.

C. Pyeongtaek-si G and H were designated as land substitution for 785 square meters, which is the land for the instant building No. 1, which is the land for Pyeongtaek-si, etc., and the land for the instant building No. 2, which is the land for the instant building No. 2, was decided to liquidate money at Defendant D’s request.

As to Defendant B and the instant building No. 1, the Plaintiff consulted with Defendant D on compensation for losses for each of the instant building No. 2, but failed to reach agreement, filed an application for adjudication on compensation for losses with the Local Land Tribunal of Gyeonggi-do.

The Gyeonggi-do Local Land Tribunal shall compensate for losses for the buildings, etc. No. 1 of this case on December 28, 2015, 37,061,800, and this shall apply.