1. The plaintiff

A. Defendant B: (a) the real estate listed in Appendix 2 List 10;

B. Defendant C is entitled to set forth in Appendix 2 List 11.

1. The facts in the separate sheet of the grounds for the claim can be acknowledged according to the whole purport of Gap evidence 1 to 9 and Gap evidence 30 to 36.

According to the above facts, the defendants have the duty to deliver real estate possessed by the defendants to the plaintiff.

2. The Defendants’ assertion that the Defendants’ compensation is too low and thus cannot be deemed as having been completed, thus refusing to perform the duty of delivery.

However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendants are eligible for business loss compensation.

In addition, even if the transfer cost compensation has been assessed low, it is a matter of dispute through an objection or administrative litigation against the adjudication, and even if such dispute exists, once the effect of expropriation has occurred and thereafter the effect of expropriation has not been suspended (in case where Article 88 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects and the above Act has been complied with, "Land Compensation Act") and landowners, etc. shall deliver or transfer the relevant land or goods to the project implementer by the commencement date of expropriation (Article 43 of the Land Compensation Act). In light of the purport of the above provisions of the Land Compensation Act, in case where the project implementer files an application for adjudication with the competent Land Tribunal and deposited the compensation for losses due to the expropriation ruling, it is reasonable to view that the project implementer completed the compensation for losses under the Land Compensation Act as provided in the proviso of Article 81 (

(See Supreme Court Decision 2012Da40097 Decided August 22, 2013). As seen earlier, insofar as the Plaintiff filed an application for adjudication with the Gwangju Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee and the Defendants deposited the compensation for losses due to the adjudication of expropriation, the Defendant is disputing the amount of compensation for losses by filing a lawsuit seeking the increase of compensation for losses for the instant building.