1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association established to remove buildings within the said area and build new buildings on the site with the area of the project implementation district of 80,836 square meters in Seoul Special Metropolitan City I Japan Special Metropolitan City.

B. On November 12, 2009, the Plaintiff obtained authorization from the head of Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City for the implementation of the above housing redevelopment project and obtained authorization for the implementation of the project on May 22, 2014.

In addition, on February 17, 2015, the management and disposal plan was authorized pursuant to Article 49(2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), and the head of Gwanak-gu has publicly announced the approval of the management and disposal plan on February 17, 2015 pursuant to Article 49(3) of the Urban Improvement Act.

C. The Defendants occupy the pertinent real estate as the owner of each of the pertinent real estate listed in the separate sheet 1 through 7 in the said project implementation district (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”).

On the other hand, the Defendants did not apply for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out under the instant improvement project.

The relevant provisions of the Urban Improvement Act and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act shall be as shown in the attached Form.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 11, Gap evidence 13 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As the head of Gwanak-gu Office has publicly announced the approval of the management and disposal plan for the instant rearrangement project, the Defendants, who are the owners of the previous land or buildings, shall be suspended from using and earning profit from the previous land or buildings pursuant to Article 49(6) of the Urban Improvement Act, and the Plaintiff, who is the project implementer, shall

Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to deliver each of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff who acquired the right to use and benefit from each of the instant real estate.

3. Determination

A. According to Articles 40 and 47 of the Urban Improvement Act, and Article 48 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, a project implementer has not filed an application for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out.