1. The plaintiff, the defendant

1. Category B: A list in the annexed sheet;

1. The real estate, the defendant;

2. C: List in Attached Form

2. The stated real estate,.

1. Determination as to Defendant B

(a)as shown in the reasons for the attachment of the claim;

(b) Articles 208 (3) 2 and 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act of the applicable provisions of Acts (a judgment made by deeming the relevant provisions as private capital);

2. Determination as to Defendant C and D

A. 1) The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association whose project implementation district covers the area of 59,919 square meters in Songpa-gu Seoul E, Songpa-gu, Seoul, and obtained project implementation authorization from the head of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government pursuant to Article 28(1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, and notified the head of Songpa-gu on July 2, 2015 of the approval plan for the management and disposal plan of the above redevelopment and rearrangement project. 2) Defendant C is

2. The real estate stated above, and the defendant D shall list in annexed Form.

3. Each owner and possession of real estate stated in the above defendants' possession exists within the project implementation district of this case, and the above defendants are subject to cash liquidation who did not apply for parcelling-out.

3) Defendant C, D, and the Plaintiff did not reach an agreement on cash settlement for each of the above possession, and thus, upon the Plaintiff’s request, the Seoul Regional Land Tribunal rendered a ruling of expropriation on April 22, 2016. The Plaintiff deposited compensation for losses due to the expropriation ruling with Defendant D and C around June 2016 in accordance with the above expropriation ruling. [In the absence of any grounds for recognition, the Plaintiff deposited the compensation for losses due to the expropriation ruling on June 2016.]

B. Determination 1) According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, since the Defendants acquired ownership of each real estate possessed by the Plaintiff, the Defendants are obligated to deliver each real estate possessed by the Defendants to the Plaintiff as its owner under Article 43 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects, barring any special circumstance. 2) The Defendants’ assertion as to the Defendants’ assertion did not constitute justifiable compensation for losses under Articles 61 and 62 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects.