1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the building indicated in the attached list.

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

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association that obtained approval for the establishment of a housing redevelopment project on May 29, 2012 in order to implement a housing redevelopment project with respect to the area of 185,269.3 square meters in Ansan-si, Ansan-si.

B. The Plaintiff received authorization to implement the project on June 2, 2015 from the Ansan market, and obtained the authorization to implement the project on April 22, 2016, and was publicly notified on the same date as the authorization to implement the project.

C. The Defendant is the owner of a building indicated in the attached list located in the instant project zone (hereinafter “instant building”), who has not filed an application for parcelling-out during the period of application for parcelling-out.

The Plaintiff deposited KRW 278,594,490 for the Defendant on July 25, 2017 according to the ruling of expropriation by the Gyeonggi-do Local Land Tribunal on June 12, 2017.

(U) The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings, in 2017. (No. 2112)

2. Determination

A. When the authorization of a management and disposal plan is publicly notified pursuant to Article 49(3) of the Urban Improvement Act, the use and profit-making of the right holder, such as the owner, superficies, persons having a right to lease on the previous land or buildings, and the lessee, etc., shall be suspended pursuant to Article 49(6) of the same Act, and the project implementer shall be able to use and profit from the former land or buildings (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53

According to the above facts, the defendant, the owner of the real estate in the rearrangement zone of this case, is suspended from the right to use and benefit from the building of this case in accordance with the public notice of the approval of the management and disposal plan of this case, and the plaintiff, the implementer of the rearrangement project of this case, acquired the right to use and benefit from

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable.