The Plaintiff

(a) Defendant B delivers each real estate listed in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Schedule of Attached Real Estate;

B. Defendant C.

Attached Form

The facts of the Defendants’ relevant part of “the cause of claim” do not conflict between the Plaintiff and the Defendant C, or can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the evidence of No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, and No. 4-2, and No. 5-1, No. 2, and No. 6 through No. 8. 5-2, and No. 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act. The aforementioned Defendants are deemed to have led to confession pursuant to Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act.

위 인정사실에 의하면, 원고에게 피고 B은 별지 부동산 목록 제 1, 2 항 기재 각 부동산을 인도하고, 피고 C은 위 목록 제 1 항 기재 부동산과 위 목록 제 2 항 기재 부동산 중 별지 도면 표시 ㄹ, ㅁ, ㅂ, ㅅ, ㄹ의 각 점을 차례로 연결한 선내 ㈐ 부분 49.02㎡를 인도하며, 피고 D은 위 목록 제 3, 4 항 기재 각 부동산을 인도할 의무가 있다.

As to this, Defendant C did not complete the compensation for losses under Article 81(1) proviso 2 of the Urban and Residential Environment Rearrangement Act.

defense.

According to the evidence evidence Nos. 9 and 10, the Gyeonggi-do Local Land Expropriation Committee made a ruling of expropriation of the amount of KRW 9,650,000 for Defendant C on October 12, 2020, and the Plaintiff may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff deposited the said money with the head of Suwon District Court No. 2549 for Defendant C on November 19, 2020. Thus, the compensation for losses to Defendant C was completed.

I would like to say.

Therefore, the defense of the above defendant, which is based on the different premise, is without merit.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendants is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all.