1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the buildings listed in the attached list.

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

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

(1) On April 6, 2016, the Plaintiff was an organization established to implement a housing redevelopment improvement project for the area (area 103,902.7 square meters) of the same unit including the site of the buildings listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”). The Plaintiff obtained authorization of the management and disposal plan regarding the housing redevelopment improvement project from the Busan District Office of Busan, Busan, and the said authorization was publicly announced on April 13, 2016.

The instant building is an unauthorized building, and the Defendant is the owner of the instant building and the Plaintiff’s member.

[Ground for recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleading

2. According to Article 49(6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, when the authorization of the management and disposal plan is publicly announced, the owner, superficies, leasee, etc. of the previous land or structure may not use or profit from the previous land or structure until the date of the public announcement of relocation under Article 54 (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da53635, May 27, 2010). However, according to the above facts acknowledged, as the public announcement of the authorization of the management and disposal plan concerning the instant redevelopment project was made on April 13, 2016, the defendant who is the owner of the instant building cannot use or profit from the instant building, and the plaintiff who is the project implementer is entitled to use or profit from the instant building, and the defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the plaintiff, barring any special circumstances.

As to this, the Defendant is excessively short of the appraised value of the instant building, and the Defendant continues to file a lawsuit against the Republic of Korea, the landowner, claiming the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the completion of the prescriptive acquisition.