1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant C, real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1, Defendant C, and Defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and consolidation project partnership that obtained authorization for establishment from the head of Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on April 15, 2009 to implement a housing redevelopment improvement project under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).

B. Defendant B, in the Plaintiff’s business area, has the real estate listed in the attached list No. 1; Defendant C, in the attached list No. 2; and Defendant D, in the attached list No. 3, has the possession of each of the instant real estate as the lessee leased from each owner of the real estate in the same business area.

C. On August 11, 2017, the Plaintiff made an agreement with Defendant B on the compensation for losses for business rights at KRW 33,490,000, and the Plaintiff deposited KRW 3,805,000 to Defendant C and Defendant D, respectively, on April 10, 2018, as the amount equivalent to the compensation for losses determined by the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal’s ruling on January 26, 2018.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings (Defendant B is deemed as confession)

2. According to Article 49(3) and (6) of the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas (wholly amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017), when a management and disposal plan under the aforesaid Act is authorized and publicly announced and compensation for losses arising from the expropriation of land, etc. is completed, profit-making by a right holder, such as the owner, lessee, etc. of the previous land or buildings within the project implementation district, shall be suspended and a project implementer may use and benefit from such land

In light of the above legal provisions, after the management and disposal plan for the housing redevelopment rearrangement project was authorized and publicly announced, the plaintiff paid compensation pursuant to an agreement to the defendants or deposited compensation pursuant to the adjudication of expropriation, and thereby the plaintiff is a project implementer.