beta
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.11.13 2015구합69164

관리처분계획취소

Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is a housing reconstruction association established to implement a housing reconstruction project in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government J 47,501 square meters (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”), and obtained authorization for the establishment from the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on June 4, 2010 from the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

The Plaintiffs are owners of land, etc. who owned real estate in the instant rearrangement zone.

B. The Defendant initially held a general meeting of shareholders on April 28, 2012 and formulated a project implementation plan (hereinafter “the initial project implementation plan”) with the consent of 279 members from among the 372 members, and received authorization from the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on March 27, 2013.

C. The Defendant received the application for parcelling-out from May 31, 2013 to July 15, 2013, the Plaintiffs did not apply for parcelling-out within the said period.

On October 24, 2013, the Defendant: (a) held a special general meeting on October 24, 2013; (b) formulated a project implementation change plan with the consent of 293 members among all the 318 members, which changes the project cost, the number of newly-built house, the number of households of the newly-built house, and the number of households of the house scale; and (c) obtained the approval of the project implementation plan from

E. On March 31, 2015, the Defendant: (a) held an ordinary general meeting on March 31, 2015; (b) formulated a management and disposition plan with the consent of 291 members among the 319 members (hereinafter “instant management and disposition plan”); and (c) received a disposition from the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office on April 24,

F. The main contents of the “project cost”, “design outline of a new building” or “the number of households of a newly-built house” or “the number of households of a newly-built house” and “the number of households of a house size”, which are the Defendant’s telegraphs, indicated in the written consent for establishment of the association proposed by the Plaintiffs, and the initial project implementation plan and implementation plan.