분양대상자지위확인
1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the Plaintiffs’ primary claim is dismissed.
2. The plaintiffs' preliminary claims are dismissed.
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant is the Housing Redevelopment Development and Improvement Project Association established on April 29, 2008, and Plaintiff A is the mother of Plaintiff B for the purpose of implementing the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project (hereinafter “instant Project”) whose business area covers the area of 77,234.2 square meters in Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (hereinafter “instant project”).
B. On June 24, 2009, the defendant issued a notice of the first application for parcelling-out to the members on September 1, 2009, after obtaining authorization to implement the project of this case from the head of Seodaemun-gu, the defendant sent the first application for parcelling-out to the members. The period for applying for parcelling-out is from September 1, 2009 to October 10, 2009.
After that, the notice of the application for parcelling-out sent on October 12, 2009 is given from October 15, 2009 to November 3, 2009.
(hereinafter referred to as "previous notification of application for parcelling-out" in the aggregate of notification of the above 1 and 2 applications for parcelling-out.
Plaintiff
A on August 6, 2007, purchased a building of 43 square meters in Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, and above ground and the building of mentor stone and the building of mentor stone 2 B in the instant project zone, and applied for parcelling-out to the Defendant on September 12, 2009, and the Plaintiff B already purchased an unauthorized building for steel framed of Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seoul, which was located in the instant project zone on December 31, 2010 from the non-party F who had already completed the application for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out.
On June 22, 2011, the Defendant established a management and disposal plan to recognize the Plaintiffs as individual buyers, and received a management and disposal plan from the head of Seodaemun-gu from the head of the Gu (hereinafter referred to as “previous management and disposal plan”), and on February 8, 2013, this court rendered a judgment to nullify invalidity of the previous management and disposal plan based on the sale procedure, on the ground that there was a significant and apparent error in the procedure for application for parcelling-out because the details of estimated charges are omitted in the previous written notification of application for parcelling-out, and the above judgment became final and conclusive as the withdrawal of appeal on January 15, 2016.
E. The Defendant’s instant case from the head of Seodaemun-gu on December 27, 2013 by the head of the Gu.