1. The Plaintiff:

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

B. Defendant C is the first floor of the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 list.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 27, 2009, the Plaintiff shall refer to the legal provisions of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), which was in force at the time of the issue, to the head of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office, without any special reference to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions

It is the Housing Redevelopment Project Association which has obtained approval to establish the association.

B. The head of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government publicly notified the Plaintiff on July 4, 2013 of the authorization to implement the project, and authorized the management and disposal plan on July 27, 2017 (hereinafter “the authorization to implement the instant management and disposal plan”), and publicly notified it on the same day.

C. The Defendants respectively leased and possessed the real estate stated in the Disposition No. 1 located in the project implementation district.

On January 3, 2019, the Plaintiff deposited the compensation for losses with Defendant D as a depositee according to the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Local Land Tribunal's ruling of expropriation.

[Ground of recognition] Defendant B and C: The remainder of the Defendants as confessions: each period of evidence of Nos. 1 through 7 (including the number, if any) and 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, 1992; Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Therefore, the Defendants are obliged to deliver the real estate stipulated in Paragraph (1) of the disposition that the Defendants acquired the right to use and profit in accordance with the public notice of the management and

B. Defendant D’s assertion asserts that Defendant D cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim until the Plaintiff receives adequate business loss compensation, relocation expenses, etc.

Residential relocation expenses, director expenses, etc.