1. The Defendant shall apply the rate of KRW 670,576 to Plaintiff A with 15% per annum from April 5, 2018 to the date of complete payment.

1. Outline of the rearrangement project: The project implementer: The location and area of the F Housing Redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter referred to as the "project in this case"): approximately 30,946 square meters in Seoul Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G G G (hereinafter referred to as the " rearrangement zone in this case"): The date of public announcement of the authorization for project implementation on February 15, 2007: the date of public announcement of the authorization for project implementation on February 15, 2007: the fact that there is no dispute over the project implementation on January 8, 2009 (which is the ground of public announcement in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government); the entries

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Article 78(5) of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation therefor (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) that applies mutatis mutandis to the implementation of a rearrangement project pursuant to Article 65(1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) provides that “A resident of a residential building shall be compensated by calculating the cost necessary for moving his/her residence and the cost necessary for transporting movable property, such as household effects, for a resident of a residential building.” Article 54(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Land Compensation Act provides that “A resident of a residential building to be incorporated into a zone where public works are performed shall be compensated by two-month relocation costs according to the number of household members when he/she compensates for the building in question: Provided, That this shall not apply where the owner of a building does not actually reside in another building in the relevant building or in the zone where public works are performed, or

Here, it is interpreted that the compensation for relocation expenses for the owner of a residential building under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas, which applies mutatis mutandis the above provisions, is for the owner of a residential building who has continuously owned and resided in the residential building from the date of the public announcement of the public announcement of the improvement plan to the time of compensating for the building in question. Supreme Court Decision 2012Du19519 Decided February 26, 2015 and Supreme Court Decision 2019 Decided December 15