1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the real estate stated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 27, 2015, the Songpa-gu approved a management and disposal plan for the A Apartment Housing Reconstruction Project pursuant to Article 49(2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents at the request of the Plaintiff on December 22, 2014, and publicly notified the details thereof in the C Songpa-gu newsletter. The main contents thereof are as follows:

1. Project operator: The name of the project subject to the authorization of Plaintiff 2) : The location of the A apartment reconstruction project B: the planned area of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (Ewon): 405,782.4m2

B. As of the date of closing argument of this case, the defendant owned and possessed real estate listed in the attached list, and the above real estate is located within the site of the reconstruction project, and the defendant is the plaintiff's member

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 2-2, 10, 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to Article 49(3) and (6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, when a management and disposal plan is approved pursuant to Article 49(2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents and its contents are publicly announced in the official gazette of the local government that approved the plan, the owner of the previous land or structure cannot use or profit from the previous land or structure until the date of the public announcement of relocation under Article 54 of the same

As seen earlier, since the management and disposal plan was authorized and publicly announced as to the instant case, the Defendant, the owner, is obligated to deliver the real estate stated in the disposition to the Plaintiff as the project implementer.

B. Judgment on the Defendant’s argument 1) The Defendant is the Plaintiff’s member of the Commercial Building Council inside the Plaintiff (the Defendant is the member of the Commercial Building Council).

In addition, even though the rebuilding was agreed to promote the reconstruction according to the independent settlement method, it did not implement it, and rather, it did not deny the substance of the commercial council itself and requested only the delivery of the said real estate.