1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 5,925,131 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from July 26, 2013 to July 24, 2014.

Basic facts are the Housing Redevelopment Development and Improvement Project Association established on February 11, 2010 in order to implement housing redevelopment and improvement projects (hereinafter referred to as the "project in this case") on the 108 square meters of land in Mapo-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government.

On November 30, 2011, the defendant has received project implementation authorization from the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government announced it on December 8, 201 to the public announcement of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

After July 24, 2012, the defendant obtained authorization of the management and disposal plan from the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government announced it on July 26, 2012 by the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Notice No. 2012-136.

The Plaintiff is the owner of the land and the housing on the ground in the attached list in the instant project zone.

(2) On March 11, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant on the land indicated in the separate sheet stating that the purchase price shall be KRW 911,00,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”) pursuant to Article 17 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Public Works Act”) with respect to the instant housing, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 11, 2013 to the Defendant on May 3, 2013.

[Reasons for Recognition] A’s without dispute, A’s evidence Nos. 2, 3, 4-1, 5-5, A’s evidence Nos. 7 through 12, A’s evidence Nos. 17, 1 through 3, B’s evidence Nos. 5-1, 2, 6-1, 2, and 7’s evidence Nos. 6-1, 6-2, and 7, and the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the claim for the main claim for the entire purport of the pleadings was destroyed due to the implementation of the instant project, which provided a residential building owned by him/her, and has moved out of the rearrangement zone.

Therefore, the defendant shall pay the plaintiff housing relocation expenses and directors' expenses.