1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B is among the four-story buildings of the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F concrete structure and brick sloping sloping roof.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association whose project area covers 63,231 square meters in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and is authorized by the head of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to establish the association on December 30, 2008, the authorization for the implementation of the project on September 26, 2013, and the authorization for the management and disposal plan on May 7, 2015. The head of Eunpyeong-gu publicly notified the contents of the above management and disposal plan on the same day.

1) Part 1st floor among the 4th floor of the building in the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F concrete building and the brick sloping roof 2nd 32.94 square meters L 18,500,000 won 2nd 1st floor among the 3th floor of the building in the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government M of 102.22 square meters of real estate 17,677,000 won among the 1st floor among the 1st floor of the 3rd floor of the 3rd floor of the 3rd floor of the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government HM pipe building, Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government HM pipe building of KRW 37,800,000 won 179 square meters of high water, 42nd 2nd 58,100,000 won, and other 3rd 2nd 2nd 3 floors of the ground steel structure and other land in

B. The Defendants are those who leased and run the following real estate located in the Plaintiff’s rearrangement zone.

C. The Plaintiff filed an application for adjudication of expropriation with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal, which did not reach an agreement on business compensation between the Defendants. On July 24, 2015, the said Committee rendered a ruling of acceptance that the amount of business compensation for the discontinuance or suspension of the Defendants’ business should be determined as the same amount as that indicated in the “business compensation” stated in the above table.

The Plaintiff deposited each business compensation for Defendant B, D, and E on September 10, 2015 according to the above acceptance ruling, and paid the business compensation directly to Defendant C.

[Ground of recognition] Defendant B, C, and D: Each description of the confession (Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act) No. 1 to 5 (including each number)

2. Determination

A. The cause of the claim: Article 49(6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) is publicly announced to approve the management and disposition plan.