The defendants deliver to the plaintiff the real estate subject to delivery by the defendant among the real estate listed in the attached list.

1. According to the purport of the evidence No. 1-9 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff is obligated to deposit to the defendant C, 46,194,000 won, 35,745,000 won, 30,000 won, 40,005,000 won, 40,000,000 won, and 70,000 won, and 305,75,785, 307, 407, and 705, and 70,000 won, respectively, to the defendant J. 1, 208 under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, as long as it is decided on August 28, 202 that the plaintiff occupied real estate in the attached list within the plaintiff's project implementation district.

2. Defendant B and F asserts that the compensation set forth in the instant expropriation ruling is too small and thus, Defendant B and F cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim.

(1) The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff’s claim is unreasonable on the premise that the compensation for losses was not completed. However, as seen earlier, this part of the allegation is without merit. However, as seen earlier, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff’s compensation for losses against the Defendants was completed by depositing the full amount of compensation pursuant to the instant adjudication on expropriation. Whether the amount of compensation for losses is appropriate or not should be determined in the procedure of disputing the legality of the adjudication on expropriation, and the Plaintiff’s request for extradition should be made.