1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 25, 2005, the head of the Gu of Busan Metropolitan City publicly announced the residents' public inspection of the improvement zone designated under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents with respect to the area of 92,936 square meters in Busan Metropolitan City.

On September 28, 2005, the Mayor of Busan Metropolitan City designated the Japan as the B Housing Redevelopment Improvement Zone under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents and publicly announced the housing redevelopment improvement plan.

The defendant is a housing redevelopment improvement project partnership which was established for the B housing redevelopment improvement project and has been authorized to implement the project on December 21, 201.

B. The Plaintiff filed an application for payment of relocation expenses, etc. with the tenant residing in the business district to the Defendant, who was the implementer of the above housing redevelopment project, but the Defendant rejected the payment on the ground that the Plaintiff resided in the building owned by the Plaintiff D but cannot be viewed as a separate tenant.

C. Meanwhile, D’s wife filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking KRW 10,787,920 against the Busan District Court Decision 2017Da36516, Busan District Court Decision 2017, Nov. 21, 2017; and the Defendant appealed as the above court 2017Na9937, and received a decision to recommend reconciliation from the above court on March 27, 2018, that “E shall receive KRW 11,50,000 from the Defendant and at the same time receive KRW 11,50,000 from the Defendant, and deliver the instant house (hereinafter “instant house”).

Accordingly, the decision of recommending reconciliation was finalized at that time because E and the defendant did not raise an objection.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that, from January 8, 2002 to March 26, 2018, the Plaintiff paid the Plaintiff a rent of KRW 6 million and KRW 3.5 million to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant resided in the instant house, which is located in the Defendant’s business district, from January 8, 2002 to March 26, 2018.