1. The defendant attached to the plaintiff

1. Withdrawal from obstacles to the entry in the list;

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

3.

1. Basic facts

A. The relevant Plaintiff is an implementer of the instant urban development project with the purpose of conducting an urban development project with respect to the size of 156,483 square meters of Pyeongtaek-si CF pursuant to the Urban Development Act (hereinafter “instant urban development project”).

The Defendant is on the land in the instant urban development project zone (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant land”) of Pyeongtaek-si 96 square meters and E large 203 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant land”).

1. It is an occupant of an obstacle to the entry in the list (hereinafter “instant obstacle”).

B. The Plaintiff was designated as the project implementer on March 9, 2015 after obtaining authorization for establishment from the head of Pyeongtaek-si on March 4, 2015 regarding the instant urban development project. After obtaining authorization for an implementation plan from the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do on January 24, 2017, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for a land substitution plan from the head of Pyeongtaek-si on July 13, 2018 after obtaining authorization for an implementation plan on May 1, 2017 and July 27, 2017, and completed the designation and public announcement of a land substitution plan on July 25, 2018 as to the land within the instant urban development project including the instant land on July 25, 2018. The Gyeonggi-do Land Expropriation Committee filed an application for the adjudication on compensation for losses with the Defendant on May 13, 2019, and the Plaintiff deposited the land substitution plan on May 13, 2019.

3) Thereafter, on June 18, 2019, the head of Pyeongtaek-si permitted the Plaintiff to move and remove obstacles, the compensation for which has been completed pursuant to Article 65 of the Urban Development Act, on condition that Article 38 of the Urban Development Act should be complied with. [Grounds for recognition] There is no dispute, and each entry in Gap evidence 1 through 12 (including paper numbers, the purport of the whole pleadings)

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Article 38 of the Urban Development Act applies to an implementer of an urban development project of the relevant legal doctrine.