1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B: (a) the building listed in Appendix 1 List;

B. Defendant E, F, G, and H are listed in the Appendix 1 List.

Facts of recognition

On April 27, 2010, the Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and consolidation project association that has obtained authorization to establish an association from the head of Seongbuk-gu Office pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).

Defendant B is the owner and possessor of the building of paragraph (1) of the attached Table 1, Defendant E, F, G, and H in the said project implementation district, the co-inheritors of the network J (Death July 9, 2015) that were the owners of the building of paragraph (2) of the attached Table 1, the Defendant C is the owner and possessor of the building of paragraph (3) of the attached Table 1, the Defendant C is the owner and possessor of the building of paragraph (3) of the attached Table 1, and the Defendant D is the owner and possessor of the building of paragraph (3) of the attached Table 2 of the attached Table 1 of the land of the building of paragraph (3) of the attached Table 1 of the attached Table.

(hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant buildings” in total, including the above real estate owned or occupied by the Defendants. The head of Seongbuk-gu authorizing the Plaintiff to implement the project on November 26, 2013, and publicly notifying the Plaintiff on December 3, 2013, and approving the management and disposal plan on March 18, 2016, and publicly notifying it on March 24, 2016.

On October 28, 2016, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal rendered a ruling to expropriate each of the instant buildings and attached facilities for the said rearrangement project.

Therefore, before the commencement date of expropriation ( December 16, 2016), the Plaintiff deposited the compensation determined by the above adjudication with the co-inheritors and Defendant C as the depositee.

【Non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including a branch number), the purport of the entire pleadings (Provided, That in the case of defendant D, the plaintiff acquired the ownership of each of the buildings of this case by depositing compensation for expropriation. Thus, the defendants are obligated to deliver the plaintiff the part of possession of each of the buildings of this case among the buildings of this case.

The defendant B, E, F, G, H, and C have failed to receive the resettlement subsidy, the relocation expense, and the director's expense.