A. 23 persons, including B, etc., are 24 units of apartment buildings (hereinafter “instant apartment buildings”) originally located within 84,181m2 (hereinafter “instant apartment buildings”) of the land of 33 lots in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, and 42 units of apartment buildings (hereinafter “instant apartment buildings”). It is called the instant apartment buildings including the apartment buildings before its alteration for convenience. A development project that constructs a building (hereinafter “instant project”) is not a single complex, but a separate unit of Dong, the Defendant obtained permission to divert the instant apartment land or permission to change the form and quality of a forest for the instant apartment land on or around February 200, and completed the instant project by June 2, 200 after obtaining permission to construct the instant apartment from the Defendant on or around August 200, and the Defendant completed the instant project by June 1, 200, the Defendant imposed the development charges under the former Restitution of Development Gains Act (wholly amended by Act No. 9045, Mar. 28, 2008; hereinafter “the instant development charges”) and 294.

B. The 23 persons, B, etc., were dissatisfied with the above disposition and filed a lawsuit seeking its revocation. On August 24, 2005, the court of first instance dismissed all their claims. However, on December 6, 2007, the appellate court rendered a judgment revoking the above disposition on the ground that “The person liable to pay the development charges of this case shall be the plaintiff, since D transferred the status of the project operator before the completion of the project of this case to the plaintiff and the project operator was changed to the plaintiff, the person liable to pay the development charges of this case shall be the plaintiff, and it became final and conclusive around that time.

(c) this;