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

Costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

Paragraph 1.

1. Basic facts

A. In accordance with the Urban Development Act, the pertinent Plaintiff is a cooperative established with the purpose of conducting an urban development project for the area of 839,613 square meters in Pyeongtaek-si Seoul Special Self-Governing Province (hereinafter “instant urban development project”). The instant urban development project implementer is the Plaintiff of the instant urban development project, and the Defendant is the occupant of the building indicated in the attached Table 2,381 square meters on the ground (hereinafter “instant land”) located on the land located within the instant urban development project zone.

B. 1) The Plaintiff was designated as the project implementer on July 9, 201 after obtaining authorization for establishment from the head of Pyeongtaek-si on April 19, 201 with respect to the instant urban development project. After obtaining authorization for an implementation plan from the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do on September 3, 2013, the Plaintiff obtained authorization for a land substitution plan from the head of Pyeongtaek-si on June 28, 2018, and completed the designation and announcement of a land within the instant urban development project including the instant land on July 9, 2018 as the effective date for the land within the instant urban development project, including the instant land, on July 10, 2018. 2) On December 23, 2019, Pyeongtaek-si did not comply with the provisions of Article 38 of the Urban Development Act on buildings, the compensation for which was completed pursuant to Article 65 of the Urban Development Act.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1-9 (including number in case of each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim, etc.

(a) If deemed necessary under Article 38 (1) of the Urban Development Act, an implementer of an urban development project may relocate or remove buildings, etc. located in an urban development zone, and if there is anyone who occupies buildings, etc. and such building, etc. are interfered with such relocation or removal, it shall be deemed that he/she may claim the eviction from the

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da89549, Sept. 4, 2014). As to the instant case.