1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

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

3...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association established for the purpose of implementing a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant housing redevelopment and rearrangement project”) of the Daegu-gu Dong-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Seoul Special Metropolitan City 46,844 square meters (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”). The Plaintiff completed the establishment registration on April 2, 2015 after obtaining authorization from the head of the Daegu Metropolitan City Dong-gu Special Metropolitan City on March 25, 2015 for the establishment of the association.

B. The Plaintiff obtained authorization for the implementation of the instant housing redevelopment improvement project on February 8, 2017 (the date of the public notice of authorization), and obtained authorization for the management and disposal plan on June 1, 2018.

(Public Notice Date of Authorization, June 11, 2018).

The Defendant, as the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet in the improvement zone of this case (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”), is occupying and using it.

The Plaintiff obtained a ruling of expropriation on March 25, 2019 for the real estate in the instant rearrangement zone, including the instant real estate, and deposited KRW 104,564,500 for the Defendant’s compensation following the said ruling to the Daegu District Court.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 9, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to deliver each of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, who is the project implementer, unless there are special circumstances.

3. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The Defendant’s defense of resettlement funds, relocation expenses, relocation expenses, and director’s non-performance of the claim of this case is not possible before receiving relocation funds, relocation funds, relocation expenses, and director’s expenses. However, there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant constitutes a person eligible for relocation funds, relocation expenses, and relocation expenses. Rather, according to the above evidence and the evidence No. 10, the Defendant’s failure to reside in each of the instant real estate is recognized and is not included in the subject of relocation funds, relocation expenses, and relocation expenses.