1. The judgment of the first instance court, including some of the plaintiffs' claims expanded in the trial, shall be modified as follows.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as the statement under paragraph (1) of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, and thus, citing it by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Under Article 47 subparagraph 1 and 2 of the Urban Improvement Act, when the owner of land, etc. fails to apply for a parcelling-out or withdraws the application for a parcelling-out, the project implementer shall liquidate the land, buildings, or other rights in cash within 150 days from the "date falling under such application" as prescribed by the Presidential Decree. Here, when there is an obligation to pay the liquidation money to the owner of land, etc. who failed to apply for a parcelling-out or has withdrawn the application for a parcelling-out before the expiration of the period for the parcelling-out application, the time when the obligation to pay the liquidation money arises is the following day of the expiration of the period for the parcelling-out application as prescribed by Article 46 of the same Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Da37780, Oct. 9, 2008).

B. The time when the obligation to pay the liquidation money arises to the owner of land, etc. who did not apply for a parcelling-out in accordance with relevant laws, the time when the obligation to pay the liquidation money arises shall be deemed to be the “date following the end of the period of application for parcelling-out” as stipulated by the project implementer pursuant to Article 46 of the Urban Improvement Act. Therefore, the time of assessing the value of the land, building,