1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B: (a) the real estate listed in Appendix 1 List 1;

B. Defendant C, D, and E are listed in Appendix 1 List 2.

1. Each claim against Defendant C, D, and E

A. 1) On July 13, 2009, the Plaintiff is a Housing Redevelopment Project Association established to implement a housing redevelopment improvement project by making the 52,749m2 in the Dong-gu, Gwangju Metropolitan City as the business area. 2) On the same day, the Plaintiff was authorized to implement the project for the said business area by the head of the Dong-gu, Gwangju Metropolitan City, and the Plaintiff was notified as O of the Dong-gu, Gwangju Metropolitan City on December 27, 2017 after receiving the application for the establishment from its members.

3) The Defendants are real estate listed in attached Table 1 List 2 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) located within the said business area.

(1) The Plaintiff’s members holding the instant real estate as one-third owners of the shares, and applying for a parcelling-out to the Plaintiff are the Plaintiff’s members. [The Plaintiff’s members holding the instant real estate as one-third owners of the shares, and the purport of the entire pleadings and arguments are as follows.

B. According to the main sentence of Article 49(6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, when a management and disposal plan is authorized and such public notice is made, the owner, etc. of the previous land or structure shall not use or benefit from the previous land or structure until the public notice of relocation is given under Article

As seen above, there is a public notice of authorization for a management and disposal plan. Therefore, the Defendants cannot use and benefit from each real estate listed in the attached list, and are obligated to deliver each real estate to the Plaintiff, who is the project implementer.

C. The Defendants asserted to the effect that the appraisal value of the instant real estate is too low and thus the Plaintiff cannot comply with the Plaintiff’s claim.

However, the above Defendants are not eligible for compensation as members of the association who applied for parcelling-out to the Plaintiff, and the amount of the appraised value is limited to the part necessary to calculate the amount of the contribution when the above Defendants pay the parcelling-out price.