The judgment below

Among them, the part against the Defendant against R, S, and K is reversed, and this part of the case is to be tried at the Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate brief filed).

1. As to the Defendant’s ground of appeal

A. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2, the lower court determined as follows: (a) the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation Therefor (amended by Act No. 8665, Oct. 17, 2007; hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”).

Article 78(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (amended by Presidential Decree No. 20722, Feb. 29, 2008; hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the Land Compensation Act”).

As to the Defendant’s assertion that Article 40(3)1 and 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Land Compensation Act constitutes the grounds for exclusion from the legal person subject to relocation measures, Article 6 of the Addenda to the Enforcement Decree of the Land Compensation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2002. Dec. 30, 2002) (hereinafter “Article 6

In accordance with Article 78(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Land Compensation Act, an unauthorized building constructed before January 24, 1989, does not constitute an unauthorized building under Article 40(3)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Land Compensation Act even if the time of acquiring the ownership of the building after January 24, 1989. Under the premise that a person who owns and meets the requirements for residence as of the date of public announcement of the compensation plan for each of the instant projects shall be considered as a person subject to relocation measures under Article 78(1) of the Land Compensation Act. The above plaintiffs acquired and continuously resided in the relevant house or an unauthorized building constructed before January 24, 1989, since all of the above plaintiffs were to be subject to relocation measures under Article 40(3)1 and 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Land Compensation Act, and therefore, all of the above plaintiffs are subject to relocation measures under Article 78(1) of the Land Compensation Act, and thus, they are obligated to install the basic facilities to impose the relocation measures.