환지예정지지정처분취소
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case is as follows, except for adding the judgment on the plaintiffs' allegations, and therefore, it is identical to the part on the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination
A. The Plaintiffs’ assertion 1) The Defendant’s articles of association, which did not adopt a resolution of the board of representatives on the preparation of a replotting plan, requires the resolution of the board of representatives on the preparation of a replotting plan. However, the Defendant did not undergo the resolution of the board of representatives on the preparation of a replotting plan. The instant disposition based on such illegal replotting plan is unlawful. 2) According to Article 34(2) of the Urban Development Act, which is an illegal designation of land secured for recompense of development outlay and Chapter 4-6-3 of the Urban Development Business Directive, which is the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport
However, since the Defendant became final and conclusive as a general commercial area and designated N block, which is an area irrelevant to the promotion of construction of multi-family housing, as a collective development recompense area, the instant disposition is unlawful.
3. According to Article 4 of the Urban Development Act regarding the amendment of a development plan, where a development plan for an urban development project, excluding minor matters, is to be amended with consent of at least 2/3 of the land size and at least 1/2 of the total number of land owners in the area. Article 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Urban Development Act provides that “If the project cost is increased to less than 10/100 of the total project cost, it shall be deemed to be the amendment of minor matters.”
Therefore, if the project cost increases by at least 10/100 of the total project cost, the general meeting is the owner of the land equivalent to at least 2/3 of the area of the land.