2. The costs of appeal, including the costs of supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

A. On December 31, 2009, the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (hereinafter “the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs”) established and publicly announced a master plan for the construction project of the construction project of the construction project of the metropolitan-type high-speed rail (Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs No. 2009-1310), May 27, 2011, the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs approved and publicly announced the implementation plan of the construction project of the metropolitan-type high-speed rail (hereinafter “instant

(Public Notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs No. 2011-246, hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”).

The Plaintiff owned each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant land”) on the prospective site to be implemented by the instant project, but the ownership was transferred to the Korea Rail Network Authority on the same day on May 30, 2012, based on the instant disposition on the instant land.

C. Meanwhile, the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, while rendering the instant disposition, publicly announced the topographical map in a manner that peruses it in the Land Use Regulation Information System (hereinafter “Land Information System”) pursuant to Article 8 of the Framework Act on the Regulation of Land Use and Article 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and the Intervenor joining the Intervenor (hereinafter “Supplementary Intervenor”) who is delegated by the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs with the State’s affairs concerning the public announcement of topographic map (hereinafter “Supplementary Intervenor”) was announced in the land information system only after the point of March 19, 2012, about 10 months

Accordingly, on August 23, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant disposition (hereinafter “relevant administrative litigation”) with the Seoul Administrative Court 201Guhap27537, asserting that the instant disposition was unlawful on the grounds of the procedural defect in the omission of the announcement of the topographic map. The Seoul Administrative Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on November 30, 201, but was in the process of omitting the announcement of the topographic map.