1. The Plaintiff:

(a) Defendant B and C shall have the real property listed in Appendix 1:

B. Defendant D shall provide the real estate listed in the attached Table 2.

1. According to the evidence evidence evidence Nos. 1 through 12, the plaintiff is a housing redevelopment improvement project association established to implement a housing redevelopment improvement project in the Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government H Il-gu, Seoul, with authorization to establish the association on July 20, 2009, and the head of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government after obtaining authorization to implement the project on December 30, 201 and obtaining authorization to implement the project on September 1, 2015, and publicly notified the management and disposal plan on September 1, 2015. The defendants owned each real estate specified in paragraph (1) within each of the above redevelopment improvement project zone and became a person subject to cash liquidation because they did not file an application for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out, and the local Land Tribunal of Seoul Metropolitan Government decided to expropriate each real estate specified in the Disposition No. 1 on December 18, 2015, and the plaintiff deposited all the aforementioned amount deposited by the defendants on January 26, 2016.

2. When a public notice of an administrative disposition plan under Article 49(3) of the Act is given, the use and profit-making by the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, lessee, etc. against the previous land or buildings shall be suspended pursuant to Article 49(6) of the Act, and the project implementer may use and profit from the former land or buildings (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 91Da22094, Dec. 22, 192; Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Therefore, the Plaintiff who acquired the right to use and profit-making in accordance with the public notice of the administrative disposition plan of this case, the Defendant B and C, the real estate listed in the attached Table 1; the real estate listed in the attached Table 2; the real estate listed in the attached Table 3; the Defendant F, each,

On the other hand, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Land Tribunal set the amount of KRW 7,421,690 by multiplying the unit price of KRW 146,500 by the unit price of KRW 146,500 on the premise that the area of real estate listed in the attached Table 7 List owned by Defendant G is 50.6.