1. The Plaintiff’s rehabilitation obligor, a lawsuit taking over the Plaintiff’s lawsuit, Ulsan Construction Co., Ltd.

1. Basic facts

A. The relationship 1) The Plaintiff’s land E and F (hereinafter “each land of this case”) owned by the Plaintiff as of October 2007, 2007.

(2) The Ulsan Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Tuld Construction”) is a company which ordered civil engineering works of the Korea Land and Housing Corporation (hereinafter “Land Housing Corporation”) and the “G District Housing Site Development Project” (hereinafter “instant project”) implemented by the Gyeonggi-do Urban Corporation (hereinafter “instant project”), and Defendant B, as H of the said project, performed the field work of sand in the instant construction.

3) Meanwhile, on October 22, 2014, Ulsan Construction was decided to commence rehabilitation procedures at the Seoul Central District Court as 2014 Gohap175, and the procedure was commenced and was decided to grant authorization on July 1, 2015, and completed September 19, 2016. (b) The Korea Land and Housing Corporation paid the Plaintiff the compensation for the instant land for the implementation of the instant project, and completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant land among each of the instant land on April 6, 2009, and for the F land on June 5, 2009, for each consultation acquisition.

2) However, in the process of acquiring each of the instant lands through consultation, the Korea Land and Housing Corporation shall grant 13-year tree trees (hereinafter “instant tree”) planted on each of the instant lands on the ground in the process of acquiring each of the instant land through consultation.

The reason that the instant housing site development zone was planted after the public inspection and announcement date for the designation of the housing site development zone was excluded from the subject of compensation.

C. Defendant B, while carrying out the instant construction project on February 2013, 2013, extracted approximately KRW 700 in quantities presumed to be using the dozers. D.

The appraiser I of this court's evaluation of the market price of pine trees is a photographic material, beneficiary fee, and all other things presented by the plaintiff on May 12, 2015.