1. The Plaintiff:

A. C, D, and E, the parties to the lawsuit of Defendant B, are real estate set out in [Attachment Nos. 1] of the real estate list.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff was established for the purpose of housing redevelopment and rearrangement project of which the housing redevelopment project district consisting of 222,489m2 in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and which was approved to establish an association from the Suwon-si, on December 17, 2010.

B. On June 29, 2016, the Plaintiff received authorization to implement the project from the water supply market, and on August 25, 2017, the Plaintiff was publicly notified upon receipt of the authorization to implement the management and disposal plan (the “water supply market”).

C. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet of real estate is located within the project implementation district, and the network B and Defendant F, G, H, I, and J have occupied each of the above real estate as the owner or possessor of each real estate listed in the separate sheet of real estate.

The deceased on August 25, 2018, Defendant C, and E, the spouse, jointly inherited the property.

E. On October 1, 2018, the Plaintiff received each expropriation ruling from the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Tribunal, and deposited the Defendants as the depositee with the full amount of compensation for losses under the said expropriation ruling.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, evidence 5-1 to 4, evidence 6-1 to 3, evidence 7-1 to 4, each entry, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendants are not only obligated to acquire the right to use and benefit from each real estate listed in the attached real estate list in accordance with the approval and public notice of management and disposition plan, but also to deliver each real estate listed in the attached real estate list to the Plaintiff who acquired the ownership

B. Defendant F asserts that there is no obligation to deliver since he did not directly occupy the real estate listed in the [Attachment No. 2] list. However, according to the purport of the entire pleadings, Defendant F’s mother is deemed to have resided in the above real estate. Defendant F alleged to the effect that he cannot respond to indirect points, but Defendant F alleged that the executor of the housing redevelopment improvement project is entitled to compensation for losses set forth in the ruling of expropriation by the