1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the real estate stated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment project partnership whose project area covers approximately 63,231 square meters in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, including the site for real estate in the attached list, and the Defendant is the owner of real estate in the attached list and is the Plaintiff’s member who applied for parcelling-out within the period of application publicly notified by

B. On December 30, 2008 and September 26, 2013, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for the establishment of a management and disposition plan from the head of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Plaintiff held a general meeting on July 29, 2014 and passed the agenda, such as “case of the formulation of a management and disposition plan,” etc., and obtained authorization for the management and disposition plan from the head of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on May 7, 2015. The head of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government announced the contents of authorization for the management and disposition plan on

C. The Plaintiff’s union members D, E, and F filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for nullification of the resolution of the general assembly’s establishment of the management and disposal plan to the effect that the resolution on the “case of the establishment of the management and disposal plan” among the agenda items of the general assembly held on July 29, 2014 by the Seoul Administrative Court No. 2015Guhap52715, but the judgment against the Plaintiff was rendered on April 30, 2015 and became final and conclusive thereafter.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 2-2, Gap evidence 3-1, 2-2, Gap evidence 4-1, 2-5, Gap evidence 5-4, Gap evidence 6-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. When the determination of the cause of the claim and the public notice of the authorization of the management and disposal plan under Article 49(3) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents is given, the use and profit-making of the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leasee, leasee, etc. of the previous land or buildings shall be suspended pursuant to Article 49(6) of the same Act, and the project implementer shall be able to use and profit-making therefrom (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Therefore, the defendant, the owner of which