1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B: The real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1;

B. Defendant C shall be listed in the separate sheet No. 2.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Fact 1) The Plaintiff is entitled to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) to implement a redevelopment project with a size of 103,621.76 square meters as an improvement zone in Yongsan-si, Changwon-si.

(2) On December 15, 2015, the original city approved the Plaintiff’s management and disposition plan and announced it.

3) Each real estate listed in the separate sheet is located in the above rearrangement zone, and each owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1, and each owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2, Defendant C occupies the real estate owned, respectively.

B. Determination 1) The main text of Article 81(1) of the Urban Improvement Act provides, “When the authorization of the management and disposition plan is publicly announced, the owner, superficies, leasee, etc. of the previous land or building shall not use or benefit from the previous land or building until the date the transfer is publicly notified under Article 86.” Thus, when the authorization of the management and disposition plan is publicly notified, the use or benefit 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 Plaintiff who acquired the right to use or benefit from each real estate listed in the attached Tables 1 and 2 as the project implementer pursuant to the public notice of the above management and disposition plan, the Defendant B is obligated to deliver the real estate listed in the attached Table 1, which the Defendant

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. The Defendants asserted that they were eligible for cash settlement by withdrawing the application for parcelling-out shall be the Plaintiff on January 9, 2017.