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

A. C Bogeumjari Housing project (hereinafter “instant project”) was publicly notified on June 3, 2009 on the designation of the said district (Public Notice D by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs), and the Defendant is the implementer of the instant project.

B. On May 12, 2008, the base date, from among the persons who lose their base of living following the provision of residential buildings due to the implementation of the instant project, the Defendant established and implemented relocation measures to ensure that they continue to own residential buildings within the instant project zone from before the date of concluding the compensation contract or the date of ruling of expropriation, and supply the housing site for migrants to the persons who continue to reside in the building

C. On December 5, 2006, the Plaintiffs purchased a joint purchase of land E with 338 square meters in Hannam-si located within the instant business zone, and on June 7, 2007, on the said ground, the Plaintiffs newly constructed a general steel structure, a septic tank, a Class 1 neighborhood living facilities, a Class 2 neighborhood living facilities, a Class 1 neighborhood living facility, a 171.85 square meters on the first floor (manufacturing facilities), a 2-story 173 square meters (daily product retail stores), a 3-story 121.8 square meters (hereinafter “instant building”).

The Plaintiffs filed an application for the supply of a resettled housing site to the Defendant on the ground that “the third floor of the instant building was continuously used as a residential building.” However, on May 19, 2014, the Defendant issued a non-disclosure notification (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiffs on the ground that “the third floor of the instant building in which the Plaintiffs reside was changed to a daily product retail store (retailing facilities) on the building ledger and used the building for non-residential purposes at will without permission or reporting.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. An entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiffs asserted that the three floors of the building of this case were newly constructed for residential purposes from the beginning, and they were residential purposes.