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 recognized;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and consolidation project association established pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) and approved on March 29, 2012 for establishment of an association.

B. The Plaintiff received an administrative disposition plan from the head of Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan City on July 5, 2018 from the head of Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan City, and the head of Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan City announced the details of the administrative disposition plan on July 11, 2018.

C. The Defendant is the owner and possessor of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, who is subject to cash settlement.

On April 22, 2019, the Busan Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal rendered a ruling to expropriate the real estate listed in the separate sheet as of June 17, 2019. Accordingly, on June 17, 2019, the Plaintiff deposited the full amount of compensation for losses (However, the amount seized by the Busan East-gu Office shall be deducted) determined by the above ruling to expropriate the Defendant as a depositee.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry in Gap evidence 1-6 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to deliver the real estate stated in the attached list to the plaintiff pursuant to Article 81(1) of the Urban Improvement Act.

As to this, the defendant shall make the following arguments.

First, the defendant asserts that he is not a person subject to cash settlement, but is in the position of the applicant for parcelling-out, and in relation to this, the plaintiff cannot respond to the plaintiff's request for delivery because he is in the process of litigation

According to the evidence No. 7, the plaintiff and the defendant are found to have been in the process of litigation, such as the confirmation of the right to purchase apartment buildings under the Busan District Court Decision 2018Guhap1498, but it is difficult to recognize that the defendant is in the status of the buyer only, and even if the defendant is in the status of the buyer, the defendant still has the duty to deliver it under Articles 5(1) and 10(1)7 of the articles of association.