beta
Text
1. At the request of a change in exchange at the trial, the defendant is paid KRW 969,562,960 from the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by taking into account the whole purport of the pleadings as a whole in the entries in Gap evidence 1-1-2, Gap evidence 2-2, Gap evidence 3-5, Gap evidence 7, Gap evidence 8, Gap evidence 9-1, 2, Gap evidence 11-1-5, Gap evidence 12, Eul evidence 12, Eul evidence 1-2, and Eul evidence 2.
The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and rearrangement project partnership established to implement a housing reconstruction and rearrangement project by making the land size of 14,916.70 square meters in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, including each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) as an improvement zone, and the Defendant is the owner of each real estate of this case.
B. Progress 1) The head of Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as the “head of Jung-gu”).
A) On July 13, 2006, with the aim of implementing a housing reconstruction project as a prospective project implementation area with the size of 1,621.43 square meters outside Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, and 94 square meters as well as the 1,621.43 square meters, was changed as above.
The Promotion Committee (hereinafter referred to as "Promotion Committee")
2) On November 20, 2008, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor designated and publicly announced the 14,916.70 square meters in Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City as A Housing Reconstruction Improvement Zone (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”).
3) On December 18, 2008, a promotion committee held an inaugural general meeting of the partnership, and applied for authorization to establish the Plaintiff to the head of Jung-gu, the head of Jung-gu, on April 16, 2009, with the consent of 75 out of 98 housing and landowners in the instant improvement zone and of 100 landowners, 75 landowners, and the consent rate is 75%, and thus, the consent rate is 75% (amended by Act No. 10268, Apr. 15, 2010; hereinafter “former Urban Improvement Act”).
Pursuant to the disposition to establish the association for the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the "previous disposition").