1. The Plaintiff:

(a) Defendant B is the real estate listed in the Schedule No. 1;

B. Defendant C shall be listed in the attached Table 2.

1. The following facts of recognition are acknowledged, either in dispute between the Parties or in accordance with Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 10 (including evidence with a serial number), taking into account the overall purport of the pleadings:

A. The Plaintiff is a housing redevelopment project partnership with Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government JJ as a project implementation district pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”). Buildings listed in the attached list are within the above project zone, and Defendant B, C, E, F, and G are the owners of each building subject to delivery, subject to cash liquidation who did not apply for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out, and Defendant D, H, and I are the lessees of each building subject to delivery.

B. On August 30, 2018, the head of Seongbuk-gu Office approved the Plaintiff’s management and disposal plan and announced it on September 6, 2018.

C. On September 26, 2019, the Plaintiff deposited the compensation for losses for Defendant B, C, E, and F according to the ruling of expropriation by the local Land Tribunal of Seoul Special Metropolitan City on July 26, 2019, and paid the compensation for losses to Defendant G.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendants are obligated to deliver real estate owned or possessed by the Defendants to the Plaintiff, who acquired the right to use or benefit from the previous building, by obtaining authorization and public notice of a management and disposal plan under the Urban Improvement Act and completing compensation for losses under the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”), except in extenuating circumstances.

B. The Defendants asserted as to Defendant B, C, E, and F’s assertion that the Plaintiff is obligated to pay housing relocation expenses, movable property relocation expenses, and resettlement funds to the Defendants, who are the persons subject to cash settlement residing in a residential building pursuant to the Urban Improvement Act and the Land Compensation Act. Such obligation to pay housing relocation expenses, etc. is the obligation to pay housing relocation expenses in preference to the obligation to deliver real estate to the Plaintiff.

Modern, Modern.