1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B points out of the real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 of the separate sheet No. 4.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an organization consisting of owners of land, etc. conducting an urban environment rearrangement project in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E Group as a project implementation district, and received authorization for project implementation on September 11, 2014.

B. The Defendants currently possess each real estate listed in the above disposition, which is located in the project implementation district.

C. On November 2015, the Plaintiff received an approval for the management and disposal plan from the head of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and on November 26, 2015, the said approval was publicly notified.

[Ground of recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 5, 6 (including paper numbers), and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination of the claim against Defendant C

A. Under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), the Plaintiff, who is a project implementer, is authorized for a management and disposal plan and publicly notified the matters, and the use and profit-making of the previous owner, lessee, etc. of the subject matter is suspended pursuant to Article 49(6) and (3) of the Urban Improvement Act, and the project implementer is able to use and profit-making from the subject matter delivered in order to start the construction work. Thus, the Defendant C

have the duty to deliver any immovable property described in the subsection.

(b) Judgment by service (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);

3. Determination of each claim against Defendant B and D

A. According to Article 49(6) and (3) of the Act on the Determination of the Grounds for Claims, the former owner, lessee, etc. of the subject matter shall be suspended from using and earning profit from the subject matter when the approval of the management and disposal plan is granted or announced, and the project implementer shall be able to take over the subject matter to start the project and use and gain profit from the subject matter (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da28394, Nov. 24, 201). According to the above facts of recognition, the said Defendants are 1-A, C, as ordered, against the Plaintiff.

have the duty to deliver any immovable property described in the subsection.

B. (i) The Defendant’s assertion regarding Defendant B’s assertion can not be said to be a project implementer under the Urban Improvement Act, and at the time of receiving the project implementation authorization.