1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant C, respectively, are the buildings listed in the separate sheet (1) and the buildings listed in the separate sheet (2).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association established to implement a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project whose project area covers 51,526m2m2 in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

B. The head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government announced the Plaintiff of the authorization for the establishment of the association on July 18, 2008; the authorization for the implementation of the project on November 25, 2009; the authorization for the implementation of the project on June 22, 201; the authorization for the implementation of the project on May 22, 2013; and the authorization for the management and disposal of the project on May 30, 2013.

C. The real estate listed in the separate sheet is located within the above rearrangement project implementation zone, and the Defendants are the Plaintiff’s members as the owners of the buildings listed in the separate sheet.

According to Articles 5 and 10 of the Plaintiff’s articles of association, members are obligated to move and remove land or buildings owned by them in kind and according to a project implementation plan.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 8 (including virtual numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination 1) According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, since the management and disposal plan for the plaintiff by the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government is publicly notified, it is reasonable to view that the defendants, the owners of buildings located within the rearrangement project zone, lose their right to use and benefit from the real estate of this case, and the plaintiff acquired the right to use and benefit from the real estate of this case for the purpose of implementing the rearrangement project from that time pursuant to Article 49 (6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents. Thus, the defendants are obligated to deliver the real estate of this case to the plaintiff pursuant to the above provision of the law and Articles 5 and 10 of the plaintiff's articles of incorporation. 2) The defendant Eul's judgment as to the plaintiff Eul's assertion is invalid since the management and disposal plan received by the plaintiff