1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 9, 2005, the head of Nam-gu Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “the head of Nam-gu”) published a public announcement of 165,070 square meters in the Nam-gu Busan Metropolitan City on January 9, 2005, “B-gu Public perusal and public announcement of the designation of the improvement zone for housing redevelopment” as H.

B. Since June 15, 2005, the above area was designated as a rearrangement zone by the Busan Metropolitan City public notice I on June 15, 2005, and the JJ was changed on January 10, 2007.

C. On August 16, 2007, the head of the Nam-gu, Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”) with the same alteration as the above, approved a housing redevelopment project implementation plan with the Defendant’s project implementer on August 16, 2007, and announced it August 22, 2007.

On March 14, 190, the Plaintiff, along with K and L, moved into the first floor of the second floor of the building located in the Seoul Southern-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building”) located in the instant improvement zone, and the Plaintiff and L, after the instant lawsuit was filed, moved into the first floor of the building of the second floor of the building owned by E on March 16, 2015, which was the second floor of the building located in the Nam-gu, Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant building”), and K moved into the N of Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on December 31, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 3, 6 (if there is a tentative number, including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On January 14, 1990, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff leased KRW 20 million to E, the owner of the instant building, and resided on the first floor of the said building and relocated due to the implementation of the instant improvement project, and thus, it constitutes subject to compensation for relocation expenses under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).

Even if the Plaintiff had been residing without compensation on the first floor of the instant building, the “resident” of the residential building subject to compensation for the cost of moving a house includes not only the lessee at a cost but also the resident by acquiring a legitimate right to use.