1. The Plaintiff:

(a) Defendant B and C are buildings listed in the annexed sheet No. 1;

B. Defendant D shall be the building listed in the attached Table 2 list.

[Judgment as to Defendant B and D’s Claim]

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the project implementer of the “A Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project,” and the Defendants are those who possess buildings listed in the attached Table 1 attached hereto, and Defendant D occupy each of the buildings listed in the attached Table 2 attached hereto.

B. The head of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government publicly announced on March 2, 2017 that the management and disposal plan for the above improvement project has been authorized.

C. On June 22, 2018, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal completed the procedure for the adjudication on expropriation of Defendants, such as transfer expenses, business compensation, etc. (the date of commencement of expropriation is August 10, 2018), and the Plaintiff deposited the compensation determined by the said adjudication on expropriation on August 10, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 4-1 and 4-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, since both the public notice of approval of the management and disposal plan and the compensation procedures for the Defendants have been completed, the Defendants are obligated to deliver each of the buildings listed in attached Tables 1 and 2 to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 81(1) of the Act on the Maintenance

3. As to Defendant B’s assertion, the above defendant asserted that he did not properly compensate for the business of the salary-processing factory operated in the building as indicated in the attached Table 1 list, and that he applied for the adjudication. However, Article 88 of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation therefor provides that the above objection shall not suspend the validity of the adjudication on expropriation. Thus, the above reasons alone cannot be rejected.

4. If so, the plaintiff's claim against the above defendants is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.

【Judgment as to Claims against Defendant C and F】

1. Indication of claims: It shall be as shown in attached Form; and

2. Applicable provisions of Acts: Article 208 of the Civil Procedure Act;