A. On July 5, 2007, the Mayor of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government designated the Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “C”) 23,953 square meters as a A-house reconstruction improvement zone.

B. On July 13, 2007, the AA Housing Reconstruction Project Establishment Promotion Committee was approved for the establishment of the promotion committee by the Defendant and the same year.

7. 28. Holding an inaugural general meeting to determine the articles of association and to select the partnership officers, etc., and then apply for authorization to establish the association to the Defendant.

C. On August 23, 2007, the Defendant deemed that 154 of the 176 owners of land or buildings in the above improvement zone consented to the establishment of an association (87.5% consent), and approved the establishment of the Defendant’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”).

An intervenor was authorized to implement the project on October 22, 2007, and was authorized to implement the project on August 5, 2008 by the Defendant.

E. On June 17, 2010, the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City changed the area D 3,190 square meters (excluding F 29 square meters, but 9,237 square meters; hereinafter referred to as the “instant extension area”) into the A-Housing reconstruction and Rearrangement Zone (hereinafter referred to as the “instant improvement zone”).

F. The Intervenor requested the Defendant to revise the establishment of an association by demanding a new consent to establish an association (revision) from all landowners or building owners in the instant rearrangement zone, and the Defendant deemed that 215 of 283 landowners and building owners consented (land owners 75.97% consent rate), and revised the agreement on Oct. 1, 2010 to the Intervenor. 1.

(g) The Plaintiffs are land or building owners within the instant extension area.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 3 evidence, Eul 10-1, 2, 3, Eul 11-1 through 215, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiffs' assertion of this case is as follows.