The Plaintiff, Defendant B, the real estate listed in the attached list 1, Defendant C, and Defendant D.

The Plaintiff is an association established to implement a housing redevelopment improvement project (hereinafter referred to as “instant improvement project”) with the area (hereinafter referred to as “instant project area”) of 69,774.7m2 in Busan Seo-gu, Busan as a business area (hereinafter referred to as “instant business area”).

On January 25, 2005, the head of the Busan District District Office performed the public inspection and announcement on the designation of the instant rearrangement project and the maintenance plan.

On September 13, 2005, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the establishment of the head of Busan District Office, and obtained authorization for the implementation of the project on July 7, 2006.

The above project implementation authorization disposition was publicly announced at that time.

On January 28, 2018, the Plaintiff confirmed the project implementation change plan and obtained the approval for the change of the project implementation plan from the head of the Gu of Busan on August 22, 2018.

The revised disposition of the project implementation plan was announced on August 29, 2018.

The Plaintiff publicly announced the application for parcelling-out for the period from November 9, 2018 to December 8, 2018, and publicly announced the extension of the application for parcelling-out from December 9, 2018 to December 15, 2018.

On March 10, 2019, the Plaintiff held a general meeting of cooperatives to formulate a management and disposal plan and confirmed the plan, and received the approval for the management and disposal plan from the head of the Gu of Busan on August 14, 2019.

The above administrative disposition plan was announced on August 21, 2019.

On February 15, 2019, Defendant B made a move-in report to the building listed in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant building”), which is a building within the instant project zone, and occupied the instant building as a lessee.

The owner of the building of this case was subject to cash settlement because he did not apply for the application for parcelling-out to the plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Fact-finding, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 12, and fact-finding with respect to the head of Busan Gu's office, according to Article 81 (1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter referred to as the "Urban Improvement Act"), determination of the cause of claim as to the whole purport of the pleading is based on the previous land or structure.