1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B: (a) the real estate listed in [Attachment 19] No. 19;

B. Defendant C shall provide attached real estate.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project partnership established on October 28, 2016 after obtaining authorization from the Gwangju Metropolitan City on October 28, 2016 to implement a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”) with the area of 162,616 square meters in Gwangju Metropolitan City, and the Defendants are the members who owned and possessed each real estate listed in the separate real estate list within the instant rearrangement project zone and completed the application for parcelling-out within the period for parcelling-out within which the Plaintiff applied for parcelling-out.

B. On November 9, 2018, the Plaintiff received the approval of the management and disposal plan from the luminous market and publicly notified the said approval on the same day.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry in Gap evidence 1-5 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. When a management and disposal plan prescribed in the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) is authorized and publicly announced as to the cause of the claim, the use and profit of the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leasee, etc. of the previous land or buildings shall be suspended, and the project implementer may use and profit from the former land or buildings (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). However, the Plaintiff, a project implementer of the instant improvement project, obtained authorization of the management and disposal plan regarding the said improvement project from the Gwangju Metropolitan City on November 9, 2018, and publicly announced the said management and disposal plan on the same day, as seen earlier. In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Plaintiff, a project implementer, is obligated to deliver the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 19, and Defendant C, a real estate list No. 20, respectively,

B. The summary of the Defendants’ assertion 1 as to each of the instant real estate was set at an excessively low appraised value, and there was also a problem in the appraisal procedure.

Therefore, before receiving compensation according to legitimate appraisal.