1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B: (a) real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. Defendant C and D are listed in the separate sheet 3.

1. The facts of recognition are as shown in the annexed sheet of claim;

[Ground of recognition] The Plaintiff and Defendant B, C, D, E, F, G, and H are deemed to have been led to confessions; there is no dispute between the Plaintiff and Defendant I; evidence Nos. 1 through 4; evidence No. 5-10; and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, when a management and disposal plan is authorized and publicly announced pursuant to Article 49(6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, a person holding a right, such as a lessee of a previous land or building, shall not use or benefit from the previous land or building until the date of the public announcement of relocation under Article 54 of the same Act, and the project implementer shall be entitled to use or benefit from the former land or building (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Thus, barring special circumstances, the implementer of the reconstruction project of this case, who is the implementer of

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendants is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.