2. The costs of the lawsuit include the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

A. On January 23, 2015, the Promotion Committee for the Establishment of the F Rebuilding Improvement Project Association was approved by the Defendant to establish the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G Group (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”) as an expected area for the implementation of the project.

B. The F&D establishment promotion committee of a rearrangement project association filed an application with the Defendant for authorization to establish an association with the consent of 198 owners of land, etc. on April 25, 2016, on the ground that such application satisfies the requirements for the consent rate under Article 16(2) and (3) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) (the consent of the majority of sectional owners by each building in a housing complex, at least 3/4 of all sectional owners within a housing complex, at least 3/4 of land size, at least 3/4 of land owners within a housing complex, and at least 2/3 of land owners within an area which is not a housing complex, and at least 2/3 of land size)

(hereinafter “Disposition to approve the establishment of the instant association” and the Defendant Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s / [based on recognition] without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 7, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The details of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes are as shown in attached statutes;

3. Determination on this safety defense

A. On August 26, 2016, with additional consent from 23 owners of land, etc., the Intervenor Association filed an application for authorization to change the establishment of an association on August 26, 2016, and obtained authorization from the Defendant on September 26, 2016. An application for authorization to change the establishment of an association on January 17, 2017 with additional consent from nine owners of land, etc., and obtained authorization from the Defendant on February 3, 2017.

The lawsuit of this case seeking cancellation of the association establishment approval disposition of this case on the ground of falling short of the consent rate does not have a benefit to protect rights

B. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 2 and 7, the Intervenor’s association applied for the authorization to establish an association with the consent of the owners of the land, etc., on the part of the Defendant.