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

A. On February 28, 2013, the Defendant designated and publicly announced as F the Dongyang-si H Il-gu 45,701 square meters (hereinafter “instant improvement zone”) during the period of Ansan-si as G in Ansan-si.

B. On the other hand, on August 16, 2006, the F Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association Promotion Committee (hereinafter “instant promotion committee”) obtained approval from the Defendant to establish the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association (hereinafter “instant association”) with the aim of establishing the instant improvement zone as the area scheduled to implement the project.

C. The instant promotion committee held a resident general meeting on September 2012, and held an inaugural general meeting for establishing an association on July 19, 2014, and applied for authorization to establish an association to the Defendant on September 25, 2014, along with the requisitioned consent to establish an association from the owners of land, etc. in the instant improvement zone.

(E) On July 3, 2014, after filing an application for authorization to establish an association, the list of the owners of lands, etc. was revised and re-applicanted on the above date.

On October 30, 2014, the Defendant appears to have written in writing 468 owners of the land, etc. (468 landowners, 15 building owners, 6 building owners, and 447 owners) in the instant rearrangement zone as “469 persons” in part of the application for authorization for establishing an association for housing redevelopment project (change) on September 25, 2014 in the instant rearrangement zone.

Among them, the consent of 360 persons with approximately 76.92% of the total land area and the consent of 23,586 square meters with approximately 51.60% of total land area of 45,701 square meters is deemed to have been obtained respectively, and the establishment of the association of this case was approved in accordance with Article 16 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).

hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case"

E. Meanwhile, the Plaintiffs are owners of land, etc. located in the rearrangement zone of this case. [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Eul evidence No. 1 (which has a serial number) and the purport of the whole pleadings including each number, and the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiffs.