1. On October 15, 2015, the Plaintiff did not respond to the application by the Defendant for the supply of resettled housing sites to the Defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an owner of B’s ground brick structure, mentor records, mentor and mentor, 85.635 square meters of single-story single-story housing units, 85.635 square meters of single-story housing units, and 2.8 square meters of one story (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On May 12, 2009, the Hanam-si Mayor, the Defendant as the proposer, implemented a public inspection announcement to designate the area of 5,466,00 square meters of 3, D, E, F, as the G Housing Zone (hereinafter “instant project district”), and the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs recognized G housing projects and publicly announced it as H on June 3, 2009 by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs.

C. On July 25, 2011, the Defendant acquired the instant building located in the instant project district from the Plaintiff through consultation and acquired the same year.

8. 3. The Plaintiff paid compensation for the building.

On the other hand, on April 20, 2012, the Defendant continuously owned and resided in the instant project district from May 12, 2008, which was one year prior to the date of the public inspection announcement of the public inspection, to the date of the public inspection of the indemnity agreement or the date of the adjudication of expropriation, and provided migrants with the housing site to the person who has been compensated for the said project. ② A person who has waived the right to be supplied with the housing site among the persons to be supplied with the migrants and requested the supply of the migrants housing, or who has continuously resided in the said housing before May 12, 2009, or the date of the public inspection announcement, before the conclusion of the indemnity contract or the date of the adjudication of expropriation, and provided the person who has continuously resided in the said housing with the Defendant receiving compensation for the said housing, and provided the said person with the relocation measures and special housing with special contents.

E. On May 2, 2012, the Plaintiff submitted to the Defendant a written application for the supply of the migrants housing (Evidence No. 4) during the relocation measures, and hereinafter referred to as “pre-paid.”