The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant Intervenor.

1. In light of the main text of Article 13(1), Articles 14, 15(4) and (5), 16, 18, 19(1), 85 subparag. 4, and 27 of the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (amended by Act No. 11293, Feb. 1, 2012; hereinafter “former Act”), Articles 19(1), 85 subparag. 4, and 27 of the same Act; Articles 77(1) and 81 of the Civil Act, with respect to whether an existing promotion committee can continue to implement a rearrangement project, and the purpose of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (amended by Act No. 11293, Aug. 2, 2012; hereinafter “former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents”), as a non-corporate group for housing redevelopment rearrangement project is established, and the purpose of the Act is terminated if an association is completed by general succession.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da26787 Decided April 12, 2012, and Supreme Court Decision 201Du8291 Decided December 26, 2013, etc.). However, where the subsequent disposition to establish an association is revoked by the court’s ruling, it is reasonable to deem that the promotion committee can continue to establish an association by restoring its status and applying again for authorization to establish an association for the following reasons.

(1) Where a disposition to establish an association is revoked by a court ruling, the disposition to establish the association becomes retroactively null and void, and the association remains the subject of rights and obligations within the scope of the purpose of liquidation until the liquidation work is completed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Da9585, Mar. 29, 2012; 201Du518, Nov. 9, 2012). In such a case, it is difficult to deem that the promotion committee has achieved its existence purpose.

(2) A group of unions is established.