2. The costs of the lawsuit shall include all costs resulting from the intervention in the lawsuit.

A. In order to implement a housing redevelopment improvement project on January 21, 2008, the Intervenor of the Defendant Litigation (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) was a project implementation district (hereinafter “instant project district”) with the size of 40,018 square meters (the size of 40,695 square meters, October 11, 2010) located in Seo-gu Busan, Seo-gu, Busan (hereinafter “Seoul”) as a project implementation district (hereinafter “instant project district”). The Intervenor is the redevelopment association authorized by the Defendant, and the Plaintiffs are the land owners, etc. in the instant project district.

B. The CHousing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association Promotion Committee (hereinafter “instant promotion committee”) was approved on October 17, 2005 by the Defendant for the purpose of implementing the housing redevelopment improvement project in the instant business area.

C. On June 13, 2007, the head of Busan Metropolitan City publicly notified the instant project zone as E, which is designated and publicly notified as a rearrangement zone.

After holding an inaugural general meeting of the association on October 27, 2007, the instant promotion committee applied for authorization to establish the association to the Defendant on December 18, 2007, along with a written consent to establish the association of 169 out of 201 owners of land, etc. (84.08%). The Defendant approved the establishment of an intervenor on January 21, 2008.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant authorization disposition”). (e)

On September 8, 2010, an intervenor filed an application for authorization to change the establishment of an association with the content of changing the size of the partnership's officers and the project area of this case. On October 11, 2009, the defendant revised the contents of changing the size of the partnership's officers and the area of the project area.

(hereinafter referred to as “approval for Change” and “each of the dispositions of this case” referred to as “each of the dispositions of this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry in Gap’s 1 through 2, Eul’s 1 through 3, and Eul’s 6 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiffs' assertion that the promotion committee of this case applied for authorization to establish the association is the consent rate of land owners for the following reasons.