2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On November 18, 2010, the Defendant: (a) designated and publicly notified the B Il-si B 43,519 square meters as a housing redevelopment project zone for a housing redevelopment project for a zone A (hereinafter “instant project zone”); and (b) authorized the establishment of the association with respect to the Plaintiff established for the purpose of implementing a housing redevelopment project within the instant project zone on September 23, 201.

B. Part of the owners of land, etc. within the instant project zone constituted an organization with the name of “C” opposing the said housing redevelopment project and appointed D as the representative.

C. On October 8, 2012, D filed an application with the Defendant for dissolution of an association under Article 16-2(1)2 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) along with a written consent from 105 owners of land, etc. within the instant project zone, and the Defendant returned the written consent to dissolution of the association submitted to D, by notifying the Defendant of the non-application for dissolution on the grounds that the written consent submitted on October 30, 2012 is only 103 (one written consent affixed with the seal affixed with the written consent and the seal impression, and two copies of the written consent whose representative owner’s written consent were unlawful).

D on June 20, 2013, the Defendant filed an application for dissolution of partnership with 106 persons from among the owners of the land, etc. in the instant project zone, attached a written consent for dissolution of partnership. On August 2, 2013, the Defendant returned D the written consent for dissolution of partnership submitted to D on the ground that the written consent submitted on August 2, 2013 is only 103 persons (one modified written consent of the owners of land, etc. before submitting the written consent, one written consent with no signature, and one written consent with no seal affixed) did not meet the requirement for consent ratio.

E. D. August 8, 2013