1. The Defendant’s KRW 76,948,040 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from April 25, 2012 to June 2, 2017.

1. The basic facts

On July 3, 1998, the Mayor of Incheon Metropolitan City determined and publicly announced an urban planning on the land readjustment project (hereinafter “instant land readjustment project”) with respect to “484,620 square meters, Incheon Metropolitan City, Japan, Japan, and Japan” on July 3, 1998. On July 13, 2002, the Defendant’s establishment that will be entitled to the status of the implementer of the land readjustment project and the implementation of the land readjustment project of this case was authorized. Accordingly, the land of this case was incorporated into the land readjustment project of this case by Jung-gu Incheon, Jung-gu, Incheon, and E road 93 square meters (hereinafter “the land of this case”).

B. On December 27, 2004, the Mayor of Incheon Metropolitan City approved the land substitution plan prescribed in the land substitution and rearrangement project of this case, and on October 4, 201, the Mayor authorized and publicly announced a change plan for the above land substitution plan, which contains the following: “A land, the area of which is less than 165 square meters after the land substitution and calculates the area of the right and liquidates the money based on the appraised value at the time of the land substitution.

C. As the executor of the land readjustment project of this case, the above A.

On October 24, 2011, the Defendant, who obtained authorization from the Mayor of Incheon Metropolitan City, publicly announced a replotting disposition (hereinafter “instant replotting disposition”) that includes the details of the parcel number, land category, area, and settlement money, etc. newly granted by each parcel on a October 24, 201, and on the same day, prepared a protocol for confirmation of replotting with the content that the area of the right to the “13 square meters in Seocheon-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City” among the instant land is 71.02 square meters in size, and the liquidation amount is 62,691,850 square meters in size, and the area of the “E road 93 square meters” is 16.15 square meters in size, and the liquidation amount is 14,256,

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, and Eul evidence Nos. 4 through 8 (including all of these items)

2. Attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes and regulations;

3. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The plaintiff 1 is entitled to take a replotting disposition of this case against the plaintiff.