1. The Plaintiff:

(a) Defendant B shall have the real property listed in the separate sheet No. 1;

B. Defendant C shall be listed in the attached Table 4.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 26, 2009, the Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and consolidation project association that has obtained authorization to establish an association under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).

B. On February 24, 2017, the head of Seongbuk-gu Seoul District Office approved the management and disposition plan on the project implementation district of the above case, and publicly notified on March 2, 2017.

(hereinafter referred to as the above, the management and disposal plan authorized and announced as above shall be referred to as the “management and disposal plan of this case”).

The Defendants occupy each of the real estate stipulated in Paragraph (1) of this Article (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant real estate”) located in the project implementation district, and Defendant B Educational Association (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant B”) is the Plaintiff’s member who filed an application for parcelling-out with the Plaintiff.

On August 9, 2018, according to the adjudication of expropriation by the local Land Tribunal of Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the Plaintiff deposited the business compensation for each of the relevant real estate as stated in the attached Table of the said Defendants, with the remainder of the Defendants except the Defendant Diplomatic Association, who is a member of the Plaintiff.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including each branch number, if any), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. When a public notice of a management and disposal plan stipulated in the Act on the Determination of the Grounds for Claims is given, the use and profit-making by right holders, such as owners, superficies, persons having a right to lease, and lessees of the previous land or buildings shall be suspended, and the project implementer may use and profit from the former land or buildings (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 91Da22094, Dec. 22, 192; Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are obligated to deliver each of the pertinent real estate in accordance with the authorization and public notice of the management and disposal plan of this case, which the Defendants who acquired the right to use and profit-making pursuant to

B. The defendant church.