1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the first floor and the fourth floor among the buildings listed in the attached list.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be individually counted.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 27, 2014, the Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association that implements a housing redevelopment project in the area of 87,883.6m2 of the Yongsan-si, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, with the authorization for the implementation of the project on June 27, 2014, and was subject to the authorization for the implementation of the housing redevelopment project on June 19, 2015 from the original market, and the original city announced the management and disposal plan on June 19

B. The defendant is the owner of the building indicated in the attached list included in the improvement zone of the above project, who has not filed an application for parcelling-out, and has possessed the first floor and the fourth floor of the above building until now.

C. On July 26, 2016, Gyeongnam-do Regional Land Expropriation Committee decided to expropriate the above building and its site as of 406,231,090 won and September 19, 2016 from the date of expropriation. The Plaintiff deposited the full amount of the above compensation to the Defendant on September 9, 2016.

2. The main text of Article 49(6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents provides that “When the authorization of a management and disposal plan is publicly announced, any right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leasee, etc. of the previous land or structure, shall not use or profit from the previous land or structure by the date of the public announcement of relocation under Article 54.” Thus, when the public announcement of a management and disposal plan is made, the use or profit-making by the right holder, such as the owner of the previous land or structure, shall be suspended, and the project implementer may use or benefit from the former land or structure (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Therefore, the defendant, who lost the right to use or benefit pursuant to the public announcement of

3. The defendant's assertion is arguing that the defendant is not yet able to respond to the plaintiff's claim due to the lack of compensation for loss, but the plaintiff is fully able to accept the claim.