2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On October 27, 2008, the Defendant obtained authorization for establishing an association from the head of Yeongdeungpo-gu Office as the project implementation potential zone for Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant project zone”).

B. On September 10, 2010, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer based on sale with respect to the land of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D large 36 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) located within the instant business area.

C. On February 14, 2012, the Plaintiff applied for parcelling-out to the Defendant.

On March 7, 2016, the Defendant: (a) notified the Plaintiff on March 7, 2016 that the household members (F and G) dealing with the same household as that of the Plaintiff’s spouse owned a house; (b) thus, the Defendant is entitled to parcelling-out on the ground that “only if all the household members (including the spouse of the householder and the spouse of the same household who are not registered on the resident registration card of the head of the household and the head of the household, and the spouse of the same household who are not registered on the same resident registration card as the head of the household, are not owned by all the applicants (including the household members who have the same household as the spouse of the head of the household and the head of the household)” under the former Ordinance on the Improvement of Urban and Residential Environments (amended by Ordinance No. 4824, Jul. 30, 2009; and (c) obtained authorization of the management and disposal plan (hereinafter “instant management plan”).

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff’s wife E is written from July 6, 2015 to March 13, 2016, which is owned by the Plaintiff’s fatherF, to H.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 5, 7-1, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the part of the instant management and disposition plan, excluding the Plaintiff, is legitimate

A. The Plaintiff’s wife E, along with the Plaintiff and his/her children, has resided in Bupyeong-si from July 1, 2014 until then.