1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the real estate stated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an association for housing reconstruction and rearrangement which has obtained authorization to establish an association from the Ansan City in order to implement a housing reconstruction and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant project”) with the size of 68,934.9 square meters of the members of Ansan-si Seoul Metropolitan Government as an improvement zone.

The Defendant, as the owner of the real estate listed in the attached list in the instant project zone (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and the Plaintiff’s member, occupies and uses the instant real estate until now.

B. On October 2, 2015, the Plaintiff obtained the authorization of the management and disposal plan concerning the instant project from the Si of Ansan-si, and the Si of Ansan-si announced it on the same day.

On November 19, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the members of the period of resettlement from November 30, 2015 to February 29, 2016.

C. Article 36(4) of the Plaintiff’s articles of association provides that “A partner shall leave the relevant building within the resettlement period determined and notified by the partnership, and if there is a tenant or temporary resident, a partner shall leave the building at his/her own responsibility.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to deliver the real estate of this case as a member of the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances to the plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant asserts that since the plaintiff did not receive relocation expenses from the plaintiff, it cannot deliver the real estate of this case, so there is no evidence to acknowledge the plaintiff's duty to pay relocation expenses to the defendant, and according to the plaintiff's articles of incorporation No. 2, Article 36 (1) of the plaintiff's articles of incorporation provides that "the members of the association to remove the house due to project implementation shall move at their own expense during the project implementation." Thus, the defendant's argument

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is justified.