1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the real estate listed in the attached real estate list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is, pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), a housing redevelopment and consolidation project association whose business area covers the large scale of 23109m2 in Bupyeong-gu Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, and real estate listed in the attached Table list (hereinafter “instant real estate”) is located within the above business area.

B. The Plaintiff received a management and disposal plan from the head of Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Bupyeong-gu Office on March 28, 2017, and the plan was publicly notified on the same day.

C. The Defendant is a person occupying and using the instant real estate, and the owner of the instant real estate is D.

The Plaintiff consulted with the owner of the instant real estate to acquire the said real estate, but did not reach an agreement.

Accordingly, on February 23, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for adjudication of expropriation with the Regional Land Expropriation Committee of Incheon Metropolitan City, and the said Land Expropriation Committee determined the commencement date of expropriation as of April 19, 2018 and rendered adjudication of expropriation.

E. On April 12, 2018, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 405,728,810 as compensation for losses under the above confinement ruling by the Incheon District Court No. 3685, which was the owner of the instant real estate as the principal deposit.

【Reasons for Recognition: Each entry in Evidence A (including evidence with a serial number) and the purport of the whole pleadings】

2. Determination

A. When the public notice of approval of a management and disposal plan prescribed in Article 49(3) of the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas (amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter the same) regarding the cause of a claim is given, the use and profit-making of the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leasee, and lessee of the previous land or building, shall be suspended pursuant to Article 49(6) of the same Act, and the project implementer shall be able to use and profit from the former land or building (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff is the project implementer for whom the public notice of approval of the management