1. The defendant's "C" in attached Form 1. List No. 11 of the annexed Table 1. List to the plaintiff is obvious in D.

1. Basic facts

A. Under the Urban Development Act, the pertinent Plaintiff is an implementer of the instant urban development project with the purpose of conducting an urban development project with respect to the area of 2,789,133 square meters of Pyeongtaek-si E-ri and Friwon 2,789,133 square meters (hereinafter “instant urban development project”). The Defendant is the installation and occupant of the obstacles in the list in attached Table 1, located on the land in Pyeongtaek-si, D, H, and I, the land located within the instant urban development project zone (hereinafter “instant obstacles”).

B. 1) The Plaintiff was designated as the project implementer on May 3, 201 after obtaining authorization for establishment from the head of Pyeongtaek-si on February 8, 2011 with respect to the instant urban development project. After obtaining authorization for an implementation plan from the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do on July 28, 2015, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for a land substitution plan from the head of Pyeongtaek-si on August 21, 2018. On August 31, 2018, the Plaintiff completed the designation and public announcement of the land within the instant urban development project, including the instant land, as determined on September 21, 2018. 2) The Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a consultation on compensation for losses on the instant obstacles, but did not reach an agreement, and the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Expropriation Committee rendered a ruling of expropriation on February 3, 2020.

3) On March 11, 2020, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 234,739,380 with the Defendant as the principal deposit in Suwon District Court Sejong District District District Court No. 601 in 2020, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 234,739,380. After that, on March 31, 2020, the head of Pyeongtaek-si permitted the Plaintiff to move and remove obstacles, the compensation for which was completed pursuant to Article 65 of the Urban Development Act, subject to the provisions of Article 38 of the Urban Development Act, with respect to the Plaintiff on the condition that they comply with the provisions of Article 65 of the Urban Development Act. 【No dispute exists in the grounds for recognition 【No dispute, Party A’s No. 1-11

2. Determination on the cause of the claim.