1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B shall be paid KRW 5 million from the Plaintiff and at the same time written in paragraph 1 of the attached Table.

1. Determination as to each claim against Defendant B, D, E, and F

A. The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction project association approved by the head of Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government pursuant to the Urban Improvement Act on September 4, 2008.

(2) On June 21, 2013, the Plaintiff obtained authorization from the head of Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City head of Jung-gu to implement the project with the implementation area of 68,255.8 square meters P P, Jung-gu, Seoul. The Plaintiff was authorized to implement the management and disposition plan on January 22, 2015, and was publicly notified.

(C) Defendant B occupies, as a lessee, the 102.12 square meters of land floor among the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 1 of the attached Table No. 1; Defendant D occupies the 1st floor among the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 1 of the attached Table No. 1; Defendant E occupies the 201 square meters of land among the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 1 of the attached Table No. 201; Defendant F occupies occupies the 69.11 square meters of land of the 4th floor among the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 1 of the attached Table No. 1.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings

B. Comprehensively taking account of the above facts acknowledged as to the cause of the claim, the Defendants whose use or profit has been suspended as a lessee pursuant to the above public notice of approval of the management and disposal plan are obligated to deliver the pertinent building owned by the Defendants to the Plaintiff who lawfully acquired the right to use or profit from the said building as the project implementer,

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da62561, Jul. 24, 2014).

(1) As to the Defendants’ assertion, the Defendants asserted to the following purport:

Although the purport of Defendant D, E, and F’s relevant arguments is somewhat unclear, it may be detrimental to the intent to demand compensation as described in the above paragraphs (a), (b), and (c).

(A) The Seoul Metropolitan Government requires the central government to enact a compensation law for tenants in order to find out the right of tenants who are not protected as a law, and has prepared an institutional device called “pre-consultative body,” and no agreement has been reached up to five times.