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

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

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a Housing Redevelopment Development Project Association established to implement a housing redevelopment improvement project with the area of 153,741.40 square meters in Seoul Northern-gu AB as the business area.

B. On September 13, 2016, the Plaintiff obtained authorization to implement the project for the above project zone from the head of Gwangju Metropolitan City North Korea, and received application for parcelling-out from its members, and on March 20, 2018, the Plaintiff was publicly notified as AD on March 24, 2018 by the head of the Seoul Metropolitan City North Korea, which received approval for the management and disposal plan from its members.

C. The Defendant, as the owner of the real estate in the attached list in the above project zone (hereinafter “instant real estate”), occupies the instant real estate, and is the Plaintiff’s member who filed an application for parcelling-out to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the main sentence of Article 81(1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, the owner, etc. of the previous land or structure shall not use or benefit from the previous land or structure until the date of the public announcement of transfer under Article 86 of the same Act, when the management and disposal

As seen above, the notice of the management and disposal plan was given, the Defendant cannot use or benefit from the instant real estate, and is obligated to deliver the said real estate to the Plaintiff, who is the project implementer.

B. The defendant's assertion asserts that the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim until the plaintiff prepares relocation measures.

However, the defendant is not a member who applied for parcelling-out to the plaintiff, but the defendant's obligation to deliver the real estate of this case must be implemented regardless of the establishment of the plaintiff's relocation measures, and therefore the defendant'

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is ordered to accept it.