1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B is simultaneously paid KRW 1.7 million from the Plaintiff, and at the same time, the real estate indicated in the attached Table.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 27, 2010, the Plaintiff was authorized by the head of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to remove the previous worn-out and inferior structures, etc. on the land outside Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul and 271 lots, and reconstruct apartment houses and ancillary welfare facilities.

B. On February 27, 2012, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the implementation of the housing reconstruction project from the head of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E and 271 lots (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”) pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), and obtained authorization for the implementation of the housing reconstruction project from the head of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E and 271 lots (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”). The management and disposal plan was approved on March 22, 201

C. Defendant B among the real estate in the attached list located within the instant improvement zone (hereinafter “instant real estate”), the Plaintiff’s order 1-A.

The part of paragraph (d) is leased and possessed, and the defendant D is subject to Section 1-C of the Disposition.

The part on the second floor indicated in the port is leased, and the defendant D and his husband jointly occupy the leased object.

Defendant B and D respectively terminated the lease agreement with the lessor on each leased object pursuant to Article 44(1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions, and Defendant B currently holds the claim for the refund of the lease deposit amounting to KRW 1.7 million and the claim for the refund of the lease deposit amount amounting to KRW 7 million.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-4 evidence, the whole purport of pleading

2. According to the determination on the cause of a claim, when a management and disposal plan is authorized and publicly announced pursuant to Article 49(6) of the Urban Improvement Act, the owner, superficies, leasee, leasee, etc. of the previous land or structure may not use or benefit from the previous land or structure until the date of public announcement of relocation under Article 54 of the Urban Improvement Act, and the project implementer may use or benefit from the former land or structure (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010).