1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant C, each of the buildings listed in the separate sheet, and 30.8 square meters per floor among the buildings listed in the separate sheet.

1. The facts in the reasons for the claim stated in the separate sheet do not conflict between the parties, or can be recognized in full view of the whole purport of the pleadings as stated in the separate sheet Nos. 1 through 8 (including additional numbers). Thus, the Defendants are obligated to deliver all or part of the buildings in the separate sheet possessed and used within the Plaintiff’s business area to the Plaintiff.

2. As to this, Defendant C cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim before receiving the housing relocation expenses from the Plaintiff, but the said Defendant has the right to receive the said expenses.

In light of the fact that the purpose of recognition is not to compensate for the loss suffered by the owner due to the implementation of the project, but to be paid at the level of social security, the obligation to pay is a prior performance relationship rather than the obligation to deliver the building as stated in the attached list.

Therefore, the above defendant's assertion alone is insufficient to dismiss the plaintiff's claim.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating Justices.