1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the building indicated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association approved by the head of the Nam-gu Busan Metropolitan Government on May 18, 2005 to implement the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project (hereinafter “instant Project”) with the area of 100,459 square meters in Nam-gu Busan Metropolitan City.

B. On November 13, 2017, the head of the Nam-gu Busan Metropolitan Government approved the Plaintiff’s management and disposal plan, and announced it on November 15, 2017.

C. The Defendant occupied the building as the owner of the building indicated in the attached list in the instant project zone (hereinafter “instant building”), and did not apply for parcelling-out within the period for application for parcelling-out as determined by the Plaintiff.

On April 20, 2020, the Busan Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee decided to expropriate the instant building on June 15, 2020. On June 1, 2020, the Plaintiff deposited the full amount of compensation for the instant building as stipulated in the above expropriation ruling with the Defendant as a depositee.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including the number of each branch), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Article 81(1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) provides that “the owner, superficies, person having a right to the previous land or building, leasee, leasee, etc. shall not use or benefit from the previous land or building by the date of public announcement of a management and disposal plan under Article 78(4) of the same Act: Provided, That this shall not apply where the compensation for losses under the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation therefor (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) is not completed with the consent of the project implementer or with the consent of the project implementer under Article 86.”

The Plaintiff’s authorized management and disposition plan was publicly announced on November 15, 2017, and the instant case, which was determined by the Plaintiff’s acceptance ruling.