1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 709,99 and KRW 5% per annum from May 13, 2017 to November 23, 2017, and complete payment from the next day.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 22, 2007, the head of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as the “instant rearrangement zone”) announced the public announcement of the F urban renewal acceleration plan for the Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as E public announcement of the Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government with respect to the size of 738,426 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the “instant rearrangement zone”).

The Defendant obtained approval for the establishment of the association and implemented a housing redevelopment project (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”) in the instant rearrangement zone.

On April 26, 2012, there was a public announcement of project implementation authorization for the instant project.

B. The Plaintiff’s residential situation had completed the move-in report on October 8, 2006 and continued to reside on five square meters (hereinafter “instant housing”) among the unauthorized buildings on G’s ground in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant housing”) in the instant rearrangement zone on October 20, 206.

On December 3, 2009, H made a move-in report on the instant house, but thereafter made a move-in report.

After the project implementation authorization date, the Plaintiff moved to another place and filed a move-in report on December 29, 2015.

C. On June 22, 2016, the Defendant paid KRW 5,459,992 to the Plaintiff under the name of the relocation cost, etc.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, 6, 7, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is the tenant who was and resided in the instant house before October 22, 2007, which was the date of the public inspection and announcement of the improvement zone, and the tenant who was residing in the instant house. After that, the Plaintiff’s implementation of the improvement project became to move out of the rearrangement zone.

Therefore, the defendant is seeking to pay the remainder of KRW 2,740,008 except for the housing relocation expenses and the amount received from the defendant from the director's expenses based on two households.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

C. Determination of the claim for housing relocation expenses (1) under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents.