1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B: the real estate listed in Section 1 of [Attachment];

B. Defendant C shall set out in attached list 2.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 9, 2008, the Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment and consolidation project association that has obtained an authorization to establish a project under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) with the size of 17,850 square meters from the head of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as the project implementation district, and the Defendants are the owners of each building described in paragraph (1) of this Article located within the project implementation district.

B. The head of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government publicly notified the Plaintiff’s project implementation authorization on March 20, 2014; publicly notified the project implementation authorization on October 13, 2015; and on March 31, 2016, approved the management and disposition plan (hereinafter “the instant management and disposition plan”); and publicly notified the same on the same day.

C. On September 6, 2018, according to the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on July 27, 2018 (the date of commencement of expropriation: September 14, 2018), the Plaintiff deposited the Defendants as deposits, and the compensation for losses and additional charges for delay under the said ruling on expropriation respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. When a public notice of a management and disposal plan under Article 49(3) of the Act on the Determination of Grounds for Claim is given, the use and profit-making of the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, leasee, leasee, etc., of the previous land or buildings shall be suspended pursuant to Article 49(6) of the same 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, 1992; Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). Therefore, the Defendants are obliged to deliver the Plaintiff who acquired the right to use and profit in accordance with the public notice

3. The defendants' assertion and judgment

A. As to Defendant C’s assertion, Defendant C did not pay part of the interest in arrears, and the obligation to pay the interest in arrears should be paid prior to or simultaneously with the delivery of the portion of possession.