1. The Defendants, among the buildings listed in the separate sheet, shall follow in sequence each point of Section 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 4, 2008, the Plaintiff is the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association which obtained approval to establish an association under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents with the size of 53,149.50 square meters from the head of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as the project implementation district.

B. The Defendants leased and possess the real estate stated in Paragraph (1) of this Article (hereinafter “instant real estate”) located within the said project implementation district.

C. The head of Dongdaemun-gu approved and publicly notified the project implementation plan on November 5, 2009 to the Plaintiff, and approved the management and disposal plan on September 29, 2017 (hereinafter “the management and disposal plan of this case”), and publicly notified the management and disposal plan of this case on October 12, 2017.

On March 26, 2019, according to the ruling of expropriation by the local Land Tribunal of Seoul Special Metropolitan City on February 22, 2019, the Plaintiff deposited compensation for adjudication (compensation for suspension of work and transfer of movable property) on March 26, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the main sentence of Article 81(1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, when a management and disposal plan as determined by the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents is publicly announced, a right holder, such as the owner of the previous land or structure, cannot use or profit from the previous land or structure, and the project implementer

Unless there exist special circumstances, the Defendants are obligated to deliver the instant real estate possessed by themselves to the Plaintiff, as seen earlier, since the fact that the instant administrative disposition plan was publicly announced on October 12, 2017 is identical to the fact that the Plaintiff acquired the right to use and benefit from the instant real estate located within the project implementation district.

B. The Defendants asserts that the determination of the Defendants’ assertion is not possible to comply with the delivery of the Plaintiff Union’s building, because the compensation for expropriation ruling was written.

(b).