농지수용이의
1. Among the lawsuit in this case, the part of the claim for cancellation of the civil petition and the ancillary claim are all included.
1. The Plaintiff, subject to the judgment of this Court, revoked the determination of the urban management plan as of April 14, 2014 against the Guro-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City head, and, if accepting each of the instant land, filed a lawsuit seeking acceptance on the premise that the Plaintiff would accept the conditions to prepare a livelihood measure for farming management and that the Plaintiff would be granted permission for social welfare facilities to be installed in the same group, and the first instance court rejected the lawsuit; and the Plaintiff filed a petition for Defendant’s correction to replace the Defendant with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor because the appellate court, after filing an appeal against the above judgment, erroneously designated the Defendant in this court; and the purport of the purport of the claim was modified as stated in the column of the above purport of the claim. The fact that this court granted the above Defendant’s correction on June 24,
According to the provisions of the Administrative Litigation Act, if the plaintiff erroneously designated the defendant and the court permitted the correction of the defendant by decision, the lawsuit against the new defendant shall be deemed to have been instituted at the time of the first lawsuit, and the lawsuit against the previous defendant shall be deemed to have been withdrawn (Article 14(4) and (5) of the Administrative Litigation Act) and the lawsuit against the previous defendant, which was sentenced in the first instance judgment, shall be deemed to have been withdrawn, and the claim against the new Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor by this court shall be subject to
2. Part of the defendant's revocation claim against the decision of urban management planning among the main claims
A. (1) G village of the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Filwon, where each of the instant lands owned by the Plaintiff was located, was managed as a development restriction zone, and 16 branches of the village, including the 21st house and commercial building, were completely flooded around July 201, due to the lack of dispute over the details of the disposition [based on recognition], and there was a need to improve the residential environment and to improve infrastructure.
(2) The defendant shall draw up the head of Guro-gu.