1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant D shall have the 176.70 square meters of the branch floor among the buildings listed in the attached Table 1;

B. Defendant B and E shall be as shown in Appendix 1.

1. Basic facts - The Plaintiff is the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Cooperatives established under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) to implement a redevelopment project whose size is 41,900 square meters of G G in Ansan-si as an improvement zone during Ansan-si.

On March 30, 2017, the Ansan City approved and publicly notified the management and disposal plan of the plaintiff.

Defendant B is the owner of the real estate listed in the attached list 1 and 2 located in the project implementation district and ordered as the owner of the real estate.

C. The defendant C occupies the port building, and the defendant C is ordered to do so.

The building and the defendant D are the 1-A of the disposition of this case.

The buildings and the defendant E shall be subject to the order of 1-B.

The building in this paragraph and the defendant F are the husband of the defendant B and the defendant F are the husband of the defendant B.

possession of each port building.

[Based on recognition] between the plaintiff and the defendant C: The fact that there is no dispute between the plaintiff of confession and the other defendants: the entries in Gap 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Article 49(6) main text of the Act on the Determination of Grounds for Claims provides that “When the authorization of a management and disposition plan is publicly announced, any right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leasee, etc. of the previous land or building, shall not use or profit from the previous land or building until the date the transfer is publicly notified under Article 86.” Thus, when the authorization of a management and disposition plan is publicly notified, the use or profit of the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leasee, etc. of the previous land or building, shall be suspended, and the project implementer may use or benefit from the former land or building (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Therefore, the Defendants whose use or profit has been suspended pursuant to the public notice of the authorization of the management and disposition

However, as requested by the Plaintiff, Defendant F is paid KRW 7,082,740 at the housing relocation cost and the director’s expense.