2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The application for collective land substitution filed by the plaintiff to the defendant around September 2010 with respect to Pyeongtaek-si Cl, 199 square meters is invalid.

Preliminary Claim

On September 2010, the Plaintiff’s application for collective land substitution filed with the Defendant on or around March 15, 2016 for collective land substitution with respect to the volume of 1,199 square meters in Pyeongtaek-si C, the Plaintiff confirmed that the application for collective land substitution was withdrawn by notification on the withdrawal of collective land substitution to the Defendant as of March 15 or April 1, 2016.

A. Status of the parties

On March 20, 2009, the Defendant was a cooperative that completed the establishment registration on March 23, 200 with respect to an urban development project of the size of 562,249 square meters in Pyeongtaek-si D, which is located in the said urban development project district with the authorization to establish the association from the head of Pyeongtaek-si and completed the establishment registration on March 23, 200. The Plaintiff is the owner of Pyeongtaek-si, the land in the said urban

B. Process of promoting the instant urban development project

1) 경기도지사는 2008. 9. 25. 경기도고시 E로 다음과 같은 내용으로 F지구 도시개 발사업(이하 '이 사건 도시개발사업'이라 한다)에 콴하여 도시개발구역으로 지정 및 개발계획을수립하고 이를 고시하였다.

-1. Name of an urban development zone: The location and area of the urban development zone; 2. Location and area of the urban development zone; 562,249m24; 562,249m24; and the location of the implementer of an urban development project (where no implementer has been designated, the proposer) and his/her main office; The chairperson of the Urban Development Project Promotion Committee of the F District: GB address: GB address; 5. The implementation period and the implementation method of the urban development project; 5. The implementation period from the authorization date of the implementation plan to the replotting date or the replotting method: Replotting

2) On September 25, 2009, the head of Pyeongtaek-si changed the designation and development plan of the urban development zone and publicly notified the instant project as H in the notice of Pyeongtaek-si.

1. Name of an urban development zone: The name of the urban development zone; 2. Location of the urban development zone; 562,249m2; - 560,87m2; 4. The change of the area due to the boundary surveying of the urban development zone and the cadastral change within the district; 562,249m2; 560,887m2: The implementer of the urban development project and the location of its main office; - the change of the implementer of the urban development project and the location of its main office; - the change of the FF District Promotion Committee for the Urban Development Project (G G): The address: The reasons for the change: the designation of the implementer of the urban development project and the method of implementation of the urban development project; 5. The implementation period from the date of authorization of the implementation plan to the date of replotting plan: the method of implementation;

D. Holding of the General Assembly on October 22, 2015

On October 22, 2015, the Defendant: (a) held a general meeting of partners on October 22, 2015, proposed that the development plan of the instant urban development project is modified as follows; and (b) passed a resolution with the consent of at least 2/3 of the land area and at least 1/2 of the total number of partners and members (hereinafter “instant general meeting resolution”).

1. Increase of the planned population and number of households (revision of the development plan);

- Adjustment of population per household: 2020 Reflection of indices of Basic Urban Planning (2.8 man/household per household 2.6 man/household)

- Population adjustment within existing park and green area criteria (not less than 6m2 per population);

(A1-4), 12,50-2 Multi-Family Housing (A1-4), 2382,63m22,63m22,163m2) 12,500-2 m2 m2,500-2 m202 m23,500 m23 m23 m23 m2,502 m2,500 m282,590 m2,5902 m2,020 m2,266 (A1,020 m286) 2,266 m2,266(A11,788 m2) multi-family housing (A1-5%) 9,406 m2,2382 (25.3 m25 m2,614 m2,614 m2,493 m2,413 m25343 m23143) households

4. A plan for each type of each multi-family housing;

Changes in the classification period (boron) non-high 3,360 households 4,534 households (100.0%) free blood 60 m2 or below 1,530 households (33.7%) distribution plan from 602 to 85 m2,646 households (58.4%) 85m to 358 households (7.9%)

2. Additional securing of one elementary school (revision of the development plan and implementation plan);

- Reflection of changes in area due to cadastral subdivisions

- Ensuring the addition of one elementary school by reflecting the increase of school children due to the increase in the population in M and F District plans;

2.2.3 5 2.3 4 4 2.2 4 2.10,8710.05 2 391 2 3.5 2.2 4 2.5 2 2.3 4 2.5 2 4 2.3 4 2.5 2 4 2.5 22 3536.2302 75354 6.7093.7 10,3021.8 3021.8 12,1952.2 232,631.20, 6420, 1639.3 205 2.3 205 2.3 294 2.3 1983 2.3 294 2.12.294 2.3 1983 2.194 2.294 7.254 7.205 2.3 194 2.293

A person shall be appointed.

3. Amendment to a district-unit plan;

(i)an alteration to a plan for building density;

Joint 20% below and upper limit of 230% below and upper limit of 230% below joint 3-4 and upper limit of 200%, joint 1-2-6 and upper limit of 27th and lower limit of 3-4 and upper limit of 3-4 and upper limit of 27th and lower limit of 3-4 and upper limit of 23th and lower than the upper limit of 18th and lower limit of 18th.

E. The Plaintiff’s withdrawal of collective land substitution application

On March 15, 2016 and April 1, 2016, the Plaintiff submitted a written withdrawal of consent to withdraw a collective land substitution application with respect to the instant land to the Defendant. Accordingly, on April 8, 2016, the Defendant issued a written withdrawal of consent to the Plaintiff on the following grounds: (a) it is difficult to determine whether to withdraw a collective land substitution application that the Plaintiff sent to the Plaintiff at the present time; (b) it is difficult to determine whether to reflect the Plaintiff at the present time; and (c) after the public announcement of the development plan (amended) and implementation plan (amended), it is determined whether to reflect the Plaintiff’s opinion during the public inspection period for the public inspection of the land substitution plan after receiving a land substitution

F. Defendant’s reservation to sell and purchase development recompense land

On January 22, 2016, the Defendant and Dongin Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Dongin Development”) concluded a pre-sale agreement with the N Housing Association and the company to sell 64,625.08 square meters of land allotted in recompense for development outlay among the public land in the instant urban development project zone at KRW 1,02.14,420,000,000.

On May 3, 2016, Defendant and Dongin Development entered into a pre-sale agreement with D&C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D&C”) to sell 11,570 square meters of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay out of the public land in the instant urban development project zone at KRW 17.29,7 million (hereinafter referred to as “the instant pre-sale agreement”) in order to sell at KRW 17.29,7 million (hereinafter referred to as “the instant pre-sale agreement”).

(g) Relevant statutes;

The relevant Acts and subordinate statutes and the contents of the defendant's articles of incorporation are as shown in the attached statutes.

[Ground of recognition] Unstrifed Facts, Gap evidence 1 through 6, 16, 20, 21 evidence, Eul evidence 1, 2, 4 through 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion

For the following reasons, the collective land substitution application of this case contains defects or grounds for withdrawal, and thus, ① the invalidity confirmation of the collective land substitution application of this case, ② the preliminary confirmation of the withdrawal of the collective land substitution application of this case.

1) The Defendant already sold the land subject to collective land substitution so that collective land substitution is impossible.

For the following reasons, it was impossible for the Defendant to make collective land substitution to the Plaintiff, and thus, the instant collective land substitution application is null and void.

A) In general, an urban development project cooperative shall add the conditions of application and consent to the purport that “a collective housing project implementer shall apply for collective land substitution on the condition that he/she consents to sale or joint implementation,” which receives a collective land substitution application from the landowner. However, the Defendant did not add the above conditions upon receipt of the instant collective land substitution application, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to make collective land substitution application as a multi-family housing site.

However, as in the instant development project zone, the Defendant sold the land for collective housing within the instant development project zone, and the buyers already progress the apartment construction project, making it impossible for the Plaintiff to make collective land substitution as a multi-family housing site. Therefore, it is impossible to make collective land substitution. Therefore, the instant collective land substitution application is null and void.

B) Since land secured by the authorities in recompense for development outlay is determined through the procedure of land substitution planning and authorization, sale of land secured by the authorities in recompense for development outlay can also be conducted after land substitution is authorized or land substitution is scheduled, the Defendant already sold the land secured by the authorities in recompense for development outlay and violated the Urban Development Act and subordinate statutes.

C) Since the Defendant sold multi-family housing land to be designated as a collective land substitution as well as land secured by the land secured for development outlay and multi-family housing land, collective land substitution is impossible, the instant collective land substitution application is null and void.

2) A significant change occurs in the development plan for the urban development project of this case

A) As a result of the resolution of the general assembly of this case, the previous development plan is null and void, and the collective land substitution application of this case is also filed based on such plan.

The effect was extinguished.

Therefore, the defendant shall receive an application for collective land substitution again within 60 days prior to the preparation of the land substitution plan in accordance with the urban development guidelines.

B) Even if not, the Plaintiff may withdraw the application for land substitution for the instant house on the grounds of the foregoing change in circumstances.

3) The defendant plans to liquidate money to the plaintiff.

The application for collective land substitution in this case was made on the premise that the Defendant would designate collective land substitution. However, the Defendant prepared a statement of land substitution allocation (Evidence No. 8-1 through No. 3) on the premise that the land in this case is "merger with the office of block or set, which is not a block or set," and that collective land substitution is impossible as seen earlier, the Defendant should be deemed to have scheduled the Plaintiff to liquidate money, not collective land substitution designation.

Therefore, since the collective land substitution application of this case was made by mistake, the plaintiff can withdraw the collective land substitution application of this case.

3. Determination

A. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

The defendant argues that it does not have any interest in confirmation that the application for collective land substitution in this case is invalidated on the ground that the amendment of the development plan is being promoted without the amendment of the development plan because the defendant promoted the amendment of the development plan, but the development plan is not finalized and approved.

However, the application for collective land substitution is an exception to the principle of individual land substitution under the Urban Development Act and becomes an individual land substitution subject to the case where a collective land substitution application is invalidated or withdrawn as an exception to the principle of individual land substitution under the Urban Development Act. Therefore, even without authorization as to the modification of the development plan, there is a benefit to seek confirmation of invalidity or withdrawal of the application for collective land substitution in order to eliminate the plaintiff's legal status unstable and danger. Therefore, the defendant's defense is without merit.

B. Whether the application for collective replotting in this case is null and void since the Defendant already sold the land subject to collective replotting and collective replotting was impossible

1) Whether collective land substitution was impossible or not

However, as examined below, it is difficult to view that collective land substitution became impossible due to the reasons asserted by the Plaintiff.

A) Whether land subject to collective land substitution is sold in whole

Article 34 (1) of the Urban Development Act provides that "An implementer may set a certain land as a reserved land without designating it as a substitute land for expenses incurred in an urban development project or for the purposes set forth by rules, articles of incorporation, implementation rules, or implementation plans, and some of them may be set up as a land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay and appropriated for expenses incurred in an urban development project" and Article 34 (2) of the same Act provides that "the Governor of a Special Self-Governing Province, the head of a Si/Gun/Gu may collectively set some of the land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development recompense under the Housing Act to the same

In full view of the above provisions of the Urban Development Act, the defendant, who is an urban development project implementer, may designate apartment-family housing sites as the land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay (so called "collectively secured by the authorities in recompense for development outlay"), so the apartment-family housing sites in the instant urban development project zone are mixed with the land to be collectively replaced by the plaintiffs and the land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay and the land in recompense for development outlay for collective land, and the entire land

However, the fact that the Defendant promised to sell a collective land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay through the instant promise to sell the land is as seen earlier, so it cannot be deemed that the land subject to collective land substitution was sold solely on the ground that collective reservation was made for sale of land secured by the authorities in recompense for development outlay (in the instant urban development project zone, multi-family housing land within the instant urban development project zone is located within the area of 232,663 square meters or 220,163 square meters, and the land subject to collective land substitution is smaller than 76,195.08 square meters for multi-family housing that the Defendant concluded a promise to sell (i.e., 64,625.0 square meters + 11,570 square meters

B) Whether the instant trade reservation was null and void

(1) The facts that the Defendant is an implementer of an urban development project, which implements a replotting project, are as seen earlier, and the facts that the N Housing Association or D&C corresponds to a project proprietor as stipulated in each item of Article 2 subparag. 7 of the Housing Act, are either irrelevant to disputes between the parties or may be acknowledged with the overall purport of the pleadings, and the facts that 4,176 households among the households of apartment houses (multi-unit houses) to be constructed within the instant urban development project zone are national housing size (the exclusive use area of 85mm2) are the same as seen earlier.

(2) Article 26 (1) of the Housing Act provides that "where a project operator under the Housing Act requests an urban development project operator (referring to an urban development project operator who implements the project by the replotting method under the Urban Development Act; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article) to sell land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay for development outlay for the purpose of using it as a site for national housing, the urban development project operator may sell such land preferentially to the project operator within the limit of 1/2 of the total area of the land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development recompense for development recompense for development outlay for the purpose of selling such land, as prescribed by Presidential Decree," and Article 26 (2) of the same Act provides that "in the case of paragraph (1) of the same Article, the project operator requests the project operator to sell the land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development recompense for development recompense

set forth.

In full view of the above provisions of the Housing Act and the Urban Development Act as seen earlier, a project executor under the Housing Act may request the implementer of an urban development project, who implements the project by replotting, to designate multi-family housing sites as a group of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay and sell them preferentially, and in such case, the implementer of an urban development project shall designate

(3) Therefore, N Housing Association, which is a project undertaker under the Housing Act that intends to construct national housing scale apartment houses, and D&C may demand the Defendant, who is an urban development project implementer, to designate a group of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay and sell it preferentially to them even before a replotting plan is planned. In such a case, it is reasonable to interpret that the Defendant should determine whether the land substitution plan provides collective housing.

Ultimately, the instant reservation is deemed to have been made according to the aforementioned demand for designating a group of non-owned land and preferential sale prior to the land substitution plan under the Housing Act and the Urban Development Act. Therefore, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have violated the Urban Development Act’s order through the conclusion of the instant reservation.

C) Whether land for apartment housing other than land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay has been sold

According to Gap evidence No. 14-1 to No. 4, the defendant sent to the land owner within the urban development project area of this case where the plaintiff filed a collective land substitution application on June 22, 2016, a public letter stating that "Darain S&C (each of the above evidence appears to be a multi-party L&C in light of the purport of the whole pleadings, but it appears to be a multi-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-party-

The plaintiff sold the land for multi-family housing other than the land allotted by the defendant as well as the land for multi-family housing in the above public space.

However, it seems that the above official text argues to the effect that the land owner who applied for collective replotting, such as the Plaintiff, is urged to sell the previous land that applied for collective replotting to the joint housing construction project implementer, and there is no room to interpret the purport that the Defendant sells the land for collective housing to the multi-family housing construction project implementer ( even if the multi-family land was purchased by multi-family land, it is a natural result according to the principle of private autonomy and is not deemed unlawful or as a ground for nullifying or revoking the collective land substitution application).

2) Whether an application for collective land substitution is invalid if collective land substitution is impossible

A) Article 27(6) of the former Enforcement Rule of the Urban Development Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs No. 428, Dec. 30, 201; hereinafter the same) provides that "any implementer may designate a group of land upon application of the landowner as stipulated by the rules, articles of association or implementation rules for the land planned for the purpose of constructing a building subject to the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings according to the land use plan under Article 5(1)7 of the Act." The former Urban Development Service Directive (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs No. 2009-349, Aug. 21, 2009; hereinafter the same applies) provides for the designation of a group of land in Part 4-3-2 as to the designation of a group of land in Part 60 days prior to the formulation of the development plan and obtain written notification to the landowner within the development zone, and if the area exceeds the area of the land subject to a group of land substitution, the area can be selected.

Article 27 (9) of the current Enforcement Rule of the Urban Development Act provides that "the implementer may designate a substitute lot for the land planned for the purpose of constructing a building falling under the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings at the request of two or more landowners," and the Urban Development Business Guidelines delegated under paragraph (14) of the same Article provides for collective substitute lot in Chapter 3, and "the implementer shall notify in writing the landowner within the development zone of the land substitution plan within a fixed period of not more than 60 days before the preparation of the replotting plan so that the landowner may apply for the designation of collective substitute lot, and the implementer shall receive the application" in Article 4-3-3 of the Enforcement Rule of the Urban Development Act.

B) As above, it is reasonable to view that the Urban Development Act’s Urban Development Act’s Urban Development Act’s Urban Development Act’s Urban Development Act’s provisions stipulating that the landowner’s consent should be obtained by the method of applying for collective land substitution as an exception to the principle of individual land substitution and the principle of collective land substitution.

In light of the legislative intent of the above collective land substitution application and the purport of the Urban Development Act separately stipulating that if the right of the applicants for collective land substitution exceeds the area of the right to collective land substitution, an urban development project implementer, such as the defendant, is merely the duty to designate collective land substitution only to the land owners who applied for collective land substitution (i.e., the duty not to designate collective land substitution for the land owners who did not apply for collective land substitution), and it cannot be said that all the land owners who applied for collective land substitution have the duty to designate collective land substitution.

Therefore, it is difficult to see that the collective land substitution application is null and void because collective land substitution becomes impossible.

C. Whether a significant change occurred in the development plan of the urban development project of this case

1) In cases where a person who designates an urban development zone pursuant to Article 3 of the Urban Development Act prepares and publicly announces a new development plan to substantially alter the main parts of the development plan, the original development plan becomes null and void (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Du16219, Sept. 27, 2012). In addition, in light of the content, form, and purport of the Urban Development Act-related provisions, modification of minor matters prescribed by Presidential Decree is not limited to those stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 7(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Urban Development Act, rather than limited to those stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 7(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Urban Development Act, even if the contents of the development plan to be modified are not objectively and individually examined, it is reasonable to view that the contents of the development plan to be modified include cases where the contents are sufficiently fit for interested parties, such as union members, such as rights and duties or legal status, or where it is unlikely to pass a resolution differently from the changed contents even if it was resolved by the general meeting (see, etc.).

In light of the above legal principles, it is difficult to view the content of the development plan to be modified to the resolution of the instant general meeting for the following reasons as a new development plan to be substantially modified by the resolution of the general meeting of the association members, and thus, it is difficult to deem that the previous development plan has become null and void or the subsequent development plan has become null and void ( even if the resolution of the instant general meeting was a major modification of the development plan, the development plan was not formulated and publicly announced accordingly, and thus, the initial development plan cannot be deemed null and void).

① The reason why the Defendant implements the modification of the development plan like the instant general assembly resolution is to increase the number of households by relaxing the floor area ratio of the site for multi-family housing as the planned population in the instant urban development project zone increases, and to reduce the area of the site for multi-family housing and to additionally establish one elementary school in the relevant area

② In light of the process leading up to the amendment of the above development plan or the proposal for the amendment of the development plan, even if the site for multi-family housing was reduced, it is objectively consistent with the intent of interested parties, such as members, such as the association members, etc., and it does not constitute a case of infringement of their rights and duties or legal status, in consideration of the circumstances where the floor area ratio and height limit of the site for multi-family housing were mitigated, and the

2) Furthermore, in reality, in an urban development project, the area of multi-family housing site is determined according to the rights of applicants for collective land substitution. Based on such determination, development plans, implementation plans, and land substitution plans are established. Accordingly, where a part of applicants for collective land substitution withdraws them, it would interfere with the establishment and authorization of development plans, implementation plans, and land substitution plans based on them, and, if so, there arises a problem that it is necessary to proceed with the important procedures of an urban development project connected by many parties. Therefore, it is reasonable to interpret that collective land substitution applications may not be always withdrawn even before a land substitution plan is prepared, but may be withdrawn only in cases where special economic imbalance occurs between applicants for collective land substitution and other landowners due

As to the instant case, it cannot be deemed that there was a serious economic imbalance between the Plaintiff and other land owners due to the resolution of the general meeting of this case for the following reasons. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the grounds for withdrawal of the collective land substitution application have occurred.

(1) As seen earlier, although the amendment of the development plan according to the general meeting resolution of this case was made to reduce the site for multi-family housing, it is reasonable to deem that the value of multi-family housing has increased to the extent corresponding thereto due to the mitigation of the floor area ratio of multi-family housing site. Therefore, it cannot be said that the special economic imbalance has occurred between the applicant for collective land substitution and other landowners

(2) Article 26 of the Enforcement Rule of the Urban Development Act, which provides for a land substitution plan pursuant to the land substitution plan, provides that landowners shall prepare a land substitution plan according to the amount of their rights.

Even if the value of all land owners is reduced at the same rate, it cannot be said that the change of circumstances occurred only to the applicants for collective land substitution such as the Plaintiff.

D. Whether the Defendant intended to liquidate money to the Plaintiff

For the following reasons, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff was scheduled to liquidate money, or that there was an error in this case’s collective land substitution application, and there is no other circumstance to recognize withdrawal.

① According to the evidence No. 8-1 to No. 3, the Defendant’s preparation of the land substitution statement regarding the land of the applicants for collective land substitution, and the Defendant’s merger with “O,” without stating any separate block or set number in the land substitution column,” but it is insufficient to view that it was intended to liquidate money solely with such statement.

Rather, according to Gap evidence No. 8-3, even in the land scheduled for substitution for individual replotting, it is only recognized that the size of the right to claim that does not include the block or set number is stated in the land scheduled for substitution for land subject to individual replotting, and all of the land requested for collective substitution for land can be designated as a multi-family housing site called "merger."

② Article 27(5) of the Enforcement Rule of the Urban Development Act provides that “All land in a land substitution planning zone shall be liquidated in money if it is designated as a land substitution or excluded from land substitution subject to Article 30 or 31 of the Act.” Thus, in light of the opposite interpretation, it is reasonable to deem that the liquidation of money is explicitly prohibited for land that does not fall under Articles 30 and 31 of the Urban Development Act. However, the fact that the land in this case does not fall under land substitution exclusion pursuant to Articles 30 and 31 of the Urban Development Act may be acknowledged by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to

Therefore, it is prohibited to arbitrarily liquidate the land of this case, and it is prohibited to liquidate the land of this case.

Since both a land substitution plan, a land substitution plan, a land substitution plan, and a land substitution disposition, which are premised on the settlement of money, are illegal, there seems to be no reason for the defendant to arbitrarily liquidate the land in violation of the Urban Development Act and subordinate statutes.

③ Article 39(1) of the Defendant’s Articles of Incorporation provides that “If a project implementer fails to facilitate the construction of multi-family housing due to a delay between landowners, it shall be permitted to facilitate the use of land by changing the land from the designated location of the land substitution to the cash liquidation to the land substitution in order to obtain consent of at least 2/3 of the total land substitution area by demarcated land and at least 1/2 of the number of landowners.”

This was proposed when the construction of multi-family housing is not smooth due to the separation of interests among the land owners who received a collective land substitution after a land substitution disposition was taken according to the designation of collective land substitution, and the above articles of incorporation alone cannot be interpreted as a provision for the settlement of money, or a provision for the above articles of incorporation is not interpreted as a provision for the settlement of money, not a land substitution, in violation of the Urban Development Act.

(4) Of course, in case of collective land substitution, which is not individual land substitution, it is true that individual land owners will sell the share of land acquired as collective land substitution to multi-family housing project implementer due to the economic burden of implementing the apartment house project, and as a result, give the status similar to the money liquidation who has not

However, the sale of collective land shares above cannot be seen as the same as the settlement of money in accordance with the Urban Development Act and the Act on Urban Development, the legal character of the land, and the method of market price determination.This cannot be said to have been avoided solely on the ground that the provision of the Act derived from the act of collective land substitution application is in accordance with the actual conditions or the provision of the Act derived from the act of collective land substitution application, which

4. Conclusion

Therefore, all of the plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Shin Sung-sung

Judges Shin Young-ri

/ former Urban Development Act (amended by Act No. 11068, Sept. 30, 201)

Article 13 (Authorization for Establishment of Associations)

(1) To establish an association, at least seven landowners in an urban development zone shall prepare the articles of association including the matters prescribed by Presidential Decree and obtain authorization for the establishment of an association from the designating authority.

(2) A union shall, when it intends to modify authorized matters under paragraph (1), obtain authorization for modification from the designating authority: Provided, That it shall report such modification where it intends to modify insignificant matters prescribed by Presidential Decree.

(3) Where it is intended to apply for authorization for the establishment of an association pursuant to paragraph (1), consent of at least 2/3 of the area of the land in the relevant urban development zone and consent of at least 1/2 of the total number of landowners in such zone

(4) The method of calculating the number of consenters under paragraph (3), procedure for consent and other necessary matters shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 28 (Formulation of Land Substitution Plans)

(1) Where an urban development project is fully or partially implemented by the replotting method, the implementer shall prepare a replotting plan including the following matters:

1. Replotting design;

2. Details of land substitution by lot;

3. Details of land subject to liquidation by lot and by right;

4. Details of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay or reserved land under Article 34;

5. Other matters determined by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs.

(2) Any replotting plan shall be determined reasonably in comprehensive consideration of the location, classification, area, soil, utilization status, environment of water use, and other matters of the previous land and the replotting.

(3)

Where an implementer evaluates the price of developed land, etc. in an urban development zone to which the replotting method applies, he/she shall deliberate on and determine the land evaluation council, and shall require an authorized evaluation institution prescribed by Presidential Decree to conduct such evaluation.

(4) Matters necessary for the composition, operation, etc. of a land evaluation council under paragraph (3) shall be prescribed by the relevant regulations, articles of association or implementation regulations.

(5) Necessary matters may be determined by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, which are related to the standards for replotting plan following the preparation of replotting plan, standards for designating reserved land and public facilities.

Article 30 (Exclusion of Replotting with Consent nests)

When a landowner makes an application or consent, replotting for all or part of the relevant land may not be determined: Provided, That where there is persons with rights of lease, etc. concerning the relevant land, such consent shall be obtained.

Article 31 (Land Substitution in Consideration of Area of Land)

(1) Any implementer may, if there exists a special need to adjust the scale of the area of land, determine replotting by expanding the area of land, the area of which is small to prevent such land from being excessively small land or exclude such land from land subject to replotting, and determine replotting by decreasing the area of land, the area of which is large.

(2) The size of land to be excessively small under paragraph (1) shall be prescribed by rules, articles of incorporation or implementation rules within the extent prescribed by Presidential Decree.

/ Urban Development Act

Article 4 (Formulation and Alteration of Development Plans)

(1) Where a designating authority intends to designate an urban development zone, it shall formulate a plan for an urban development project for the relevant urban development zone (hereinafter referred to as "development plan"): Provided, That where a development plan is publicly recruited pursuant to paragraph (2) or an urban development zone is designated in an area prescribed by Presidential Decree, a development plan may be formulated after such designation. < Amended by Act No. 11068, Sep. 30, 2011;

(2) If necessary for promoting an urban development project in a creative and efficient manner, a designation authority may invite proposals for a development plan to reflect the selected proposal in the development plan, as prescribed by Presidential Decree. In such cases, where a selected proposer has qualifications under Article 11 (1), it may preferentially designate the relevant proposer as an implementer.

(3) Any designating authority may, directly or at the request of the head of the relevant central administrative agency or the head of the relevant Si (excluding a large city market)/Gun/Gu under Article 3 (3) 2 and (4), or an implementer of an urban development project under Article 11 (1), amend a development plan. < Amended by Act No. 8996, Mar. 28, 2008; Act No. 11186, Jan. 1

(4) Where a designating authority intends to formulate a development plan for an urban development project by replotting method, it shall obtain consent from at least 2/3 of the land size in the area to which replotting method applies and from at least 1/2 of the total number of land owners in such area. The same shall also apply where it is intended to modify a development plan (excluding any modification of insignificant matters prescribed by Presidential Decree) to implement the development plan by replotting method. < Amended by Act No. 111

(5) Where a designating authority formulates or amends a development plan to implement an urban development project by the replotting method, if an implementer of an urban development project falls under Article 11 (1) 1, it is unnecessary to obtain the consent of landowners, notwithstanding paragraph (4). < Amended by Act No. 11186, Jan. 17,

(6) Where the implementer of an urban development project falls under an association referred to in Article 11 (1) 6 when a designating authority formulates or amends a development plan to implement all urban development projects by the replotting method, where the implementer of an urban development project submits a development plan approved by a general meeting with the consent of at least 2/3 of the area of land in an urban development zone and at least 1/2 of the total number of union members in the area after the association is established, a development plan shall be deemed excluded from paragraph (4) and the consent of landowners

(7) The method of calculating the number of consenters under paragraph (4), procedures for consent and other necessary matters shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 13 (Authorization for Establishment of Associations)

(1) To establish an association, at least seven landowners in an urban development zone shall prepare the articles of association including the matters prescribed by Presidential Decree and obtain authorization for the establishment of an association from the designating authority.

(2) A union shall, when it intends to modify authorized matters under paragraph (1), obtain authorization for modification from the designating authority: Provided, That it shall report such modification where it intends to modify insignificant matters prescribed by Presidential Decree.

(3) Where it is intended to apply for authorization for the establishment of an association pursuant to paragraph (1), consent shall be obtained from the landowners equivalent to at least 2/3 of the area of the land in the relevant urban development zone and the owners of the land in such zone.

(4) The method of calculating the number of consenters under paragraph (3), procedure for consent and other necessary matters shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 28 (Formulation of Land Substitution Plans)

(1) Where an urban development project is fully or partially implemented by the replotting method, the implementer shall prepare a replotting plan including the following: < Amended by Act No. 11068, Sep. 30, 2011; Act No. 11690, Mar

1. Replotting design;

2. Details of land substitution by lot;

3. Details of land subject to liquidation by lot and by right;

4. Details of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay or reserved land under Article 34;

5. Where a multi-level replotting is planned pursuant to Article 32, the details of buildings for multi-level replotting and methods of supply pursuant to Article 32-3;

6. Other matters prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport.

(2) Any replotting plan shall be reasonably determined, in comprehensive consideration of the location, classification, area, soil, utilization status and environment of the previous land and the land substitution, and other matters.

(3) When evaluating the price of developed land, etc. in an urban development zone to which the replotting method applies, an implementer shall determine such price after deliberation by the Land Evaluation Council, and shall require an authorized evaluation institution prescribed by Presidential Decree to conduct such evaluation.

(4) Matters necessary for the composition, operation, etc. of the Land Appraisal Council under paragraph (3) shall be determined by the relevant regulations, articles of association or implementation regulations.

(5) Matters necessary for standards for replotting plans following the preparation of replotting plans under paragraph (1), standards for determining reserved land and land for public facilities may be prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. < Amended by Act No. 11690, Mar. 23, 2013

Article 30 (Exclusion from Replotting by Consent, etc.)

(1) Where a landowner makes an application or has consented, replotting for all or part of the relevant land may not be determined: Provided, That where there exist landowners, etc. with respect to the relevant land, he/she shall obtain such consent.

(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), any implementer may exclude any of the following land from land for which replotting is not determined according to methods and procedures stipulated by regulations, articles of incorporation or implementation regulations:

1. Land to be used before reserved land for replotting is designated pursuant to Article 36-2;

2. Land, the replotting of which is determined according to authorization for the replotting plan under Article 29;

3. Land, the replotting of which is planned pursuant to Article 28 at the same location as before for the same purpose as before;

4. Where the sum of the area or appraised value (referring to the previously appraised value of land determined by the Land Appraisal Council under Article 28 (3); hereinafter the same shall apply) of land for which a landowner has applied for exclusion from replotting exceeds 15/100 of the area or appraised value of the whole land (excluding State-owned land or public land) of a zone, and it is deemed difficult to implement a project, if replotting is not determined,

5. Land concluded a contract for the acquisition of land after the date of public inspection or announcement pursuant to Article 7: Provided, That this shall not apply where three years have passed since the date of acquisition;

Article 31 (Land Substitution in Consideration of Area of Land)

(1) Any implementer may, if there exists a special need to adjust the scale of the area of land, determine replotting by expanding the area of land, the area of which is small to ensure that no land is excessively small land or exclude such land from land subject to replotting, and determine replotting by decreasing the area of land, the area of which is large.

(2) The area of land to be small standards under paragraph (1) shall be determined by rules, articles of incorporation or implementation rules within the extent prescribed by Presidential Decree.

/ Housing Act

Article 26 (Utilization of Housing Site Created by Urban Development Project through Land Substitution Mode)

(1) Where a project operator requests an urban development project operator (referring to an urban development project operator who implements a project by the replotting method under the Urban Development Act; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article) to sell land for recompense for development outlay in order to use it as a site for national housing, such urban development project operator may preferentially sell such land to the project operator within the limit of 1/2 of the total area of the land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development recompense for development outlay,

(2) Where a project undertaker requests the sale of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development recompense before formulating a replotting plan under Article 28 of the Urban Development Act in cases of paragraph (1), the urban development project implementer shall determine land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development recompense for development recompense for sale

(3) The transfer price of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay under paragraph (1) shall be based on the appraised price appraised by an appraisal business entity under the Public Notice of Values and Appraisal of Real Estate Act, as prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport: Provided, That in cases prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, such as construction of rental housing, it may be based on

Article 7 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Urban Development Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2443, Mar. 23, 2013);

(1) "Modification of insignificant matters prescribed by Presidential Decree" in the latter part of Article 4 (4) of the Act means cases not falling under any of the following subparagraphs: < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 23924, Mar. 26, 2012; Presidential Decree No. 2371

1. Where modifying the area of land to which the replotting method applies, falls under any of the following:

(a) Where the area of land to be incorporated is at least five percent of the previous area to which the replotting method applies (referring to the time of formulation or revision of a development plan with the consent of landowners under Article 4 (4) of the Act; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article) (where minor matters are modified several times, the cumulative calculation shall be the same shall apply in this Article);

(b) Where the area of land excluded is at least 10/100 of the area to which the previous replotting method applies;

(c) Where the area of incorporation or exclusion is at least 30,00 square meters, respectively;

(d) Where the area to which the replotting method applies due to the incorporation or addition of land increases or decreases by at least 10/100 of the previous area;

2. Where a road, the width of which is at least 12 meters, is newly constructed or permanently closed;

3. Where a project implementation district is divided or divided and consolidated;

4. Where the area of infrastructure excluded from roads (referring to the infrastructure referred to in each subparagraph of Article 2 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act) increases or decreases by at least 10/100 (5/100 in the case of a park or greenbelt) of the previous area, or the total area of newly built infrastructure is at least 5/100 of the area of the previous infrastructure;

5. Where a population to be admitted increases or decreases by at least 10/100 of the previous population (excluding where the population to be admitted is less than 3,000 after modification);

6. Where the floor area ratio of an urban development zone excluded from infrastructure increases by not less than 5/100 of the existing ratio;

7. Where a change in a land use plan (referring to the lowest use of land classified in the previous development plan, excluding infrastructure) referred to in Article 5 (1) 7 of the Act falls under any of the following: Provided, That this shall be limited to where the changed area by use is at least 1,000 square meters:

(a) Where an area by use increases or decreases by not less than 10/100 of the previous area;

(b) Where the total area of land for new uses is at least 5/100 of the area of the previous urban development zone (excluding the area of infrastructure);

8. Where the expenses necessary for the installation of infrastructure under Article 5 (1) 13 of the Act are increased by not less than 5/100 of the previous expenses;

9. Where the project implementation method is modified under Article 21 (2) of the Act;

10. Where an urban or Gun management plan for a specific use district / specific use district (excluding cases falling under subparagraphs 1 through 4 and 7) is modified by a specific use district;

11. Where the designating authority designates an urban development zone or determines by Municipal Ordinance of a City/Do with conditions deemed serious to protect landowners' rights and interests, etc. attached thereto.

(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if the project cost is increased by less than 10/100 of the previous total project cost due to a revision of a development plan that reflects the results of consultation on the assessment of environmental impacts pursuant to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act, the results of traffic impact analysis and improvement measures conducted pursuant to the Urban Traffic Improvement Promotion Act, or the results of prior consultation on the examination of factors influencing disasters pursuant to the Countermeasures against Natural Disasters

Article 29 (Matters Stated in Articles of Incorporation)

(1) The articles of association prepared by an association established by landowners in an urban development zone for an urban development project (hereinafter referred to as "association") pursuant to Article 13 (1) of the Act shall include the following matters:

17. Land substitution plan and designation of reserved land for replotting;

【Enforcement Decree of the Urban Development Act

Article 29 (Matters Stated in Articles of Incorporation)

(1) The articles of association prepared by an association established by landowners in an urban development zone for an urban development project (hereinafter referred to as "association") under Article 13 (1) of the Act shall include the following: < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 24443, Mar. 23, 20

17. Land substitution plan and designation of reserved land for replotting;

4. Enforcement Rule of the former Urban Development Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs No. 428 on December 30, 201)

Article 26 (Details to be Included in Land Substitution Plan)

(1) A land substitution design referred to in Article 28 (1) 1 of the Act (hereinafter referred to as "land substitution design") shall be accompanied by a land substitution plan of at least 1/1,20 of the scale of 1,00 of the land substitution, a land substitution plan of at least before and after replotting, a non-road map before

(2) When an implementer prepares the details of land subject to clearing pursuant to Article 28 (1) 3 of the Act, he/she shall determine the area to be designated as a substitute lot for the land excluded from the objects of replotting pursuant to Articles 30 and 31 of the Act.

Article 27 (Standards for Replotting Plans)

(1) Any implementer shall, when he/she prepares a land substitution plan (hereinafter referred to as "land substitution plan") under Article 28 (1) of the Act, prepare an urban development project by land substitution plan (referring to the scope of an urban development zone in which an urban development project is implemented by land substitution method, and where an urban development zone is divided into at least two project implementation districts under Article 5 (1) 3 of the Act, referring to each divided project implementation district; hereinafter the same shall apply) and take into account the current market price of the existing land in the land substitution plan zone

(2) The replotting design shall be based on the evaluation formula (referring to the method of determining replotting in proportion to the appraised value of land before and after the implementation of an urban development project), which may be appropriate from among the area formula (referring to the method of determining replotting based on the size and location of land before and after the implementation of an urban development project) and the shock formula (referring to the method of mixing the evaluation formula and the area formula) according to the characteristics of a replotting planning zone, and the same method shall be applied

® 환지는 종전 토지의 위치에 지정하는 것을 원칙으로 한다. 다만, 다음 각 호의 어느 하나에 해 당하 는 토지로서 종전 토지의위치에 지정할 수 없는 경우에는 다른 위치에 환지를 지정할 수 있다.

1. Land located in a location scheduled to be reserved land (referring to land secured for development outlay and land for public facilities; hereinafter the same shall apply);

2. Land located at a location planned as a collective land substitution under paragraph (6);

3. Other land determined by regulations, articles of incorporation or implementation rules as land which can not be designated as substitute land to the location of the previous land due to unavoidable reasons.

(4) Where any implementer designates replotting as a result of an increase of the area of land as prescribed in Article 31 (1) of the Act, he/she may designate replotting by designating the increased area of land as the land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay. In such cases, when the relevant person scheduled for replotting makes a request, the implementer may sell the land of such increased

(5) Any implementer may, if necessary for preventing the land from being excessively small land under Article 31 (2) of the Act, designate one parcel as a joint land substitution with the consent of at least two landowners.

(6) Any implementer may designate land planned to be used as a purpose for which buildings subject to the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings are allowed to be constructed on the land utilization plan pursuant to Article 5 (1) 7 of the Act, upon request of landowners, as a group of land substitution, as stipulated by regulations, articles of association or implementation regulations. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 22426, Oct. 15,

(7) Any implementer shall comply with the methods and standards at the time of a replotting plan where he/she revises a replotting plan under Article 29 (2) of the Act: Provided, That the same shall not apply where it is impossible to comply with the initial methods and standards due to changes in a replotting plan

【Enforcement Rule of the Urban Development Act

Article 26 (Details to be Included in Land Substitution Plan)

(1) A land substitution design referred to in Article 28 (1) 1 of the Act (hereinafter referred to as "land substitution design") shall be accompanied by a 1/1,200 or more of the scale of the land substitution scheduled for replotting, a plan of land substitution scheduled for replotting before and after replotting, a comparison map before and after replotting, an excessive or deficient area display map, and an indication map by the evaluation group after before replotting

(2) When an implementer prepares a detailed statement of land subject to clearing pursuant to Article 28 (1) 3 of the Act, he/she shall determine the area of rights under the latter part of Article 62 (1) of the Decree (hereinafter referred to as "area of rights") as well as land excluded from the objects of replotting pursuant to Articles 30 and 31 of the Act. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 2386, Mar. 30,

(3) "Matters prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport" in Article 28 (1) 6 of the Act means the following:

1. Revenue and expenditure plan;

2. The average rate and proportion of charges and its calculation statement (limited to cases where a replotting design is designed by an evaluation formula under Article 27 (3));

3-Construction plans (limited to where multi-level replotting is implemented)

4. Results of deliberation by the Land Appraisal Council under Article 28 (3) of the Act;

(4) The average burden and proportionality under paragraph (3) 2 shall be in accordance with the following formula:

1. Average burden rate;

[Total Project Costs/(total sum of the values of rights + Aggregate of the values of non-replacement)] X 100

2. Proportional ratio:

｛[도시개발사업으로 조성되는 토지•건축물의 평가액 합계(공공시설또는 무상으로 공급되는 토지•건축 믈의 평가액 합계를 제외한다) - 총사업비] /〔환지 전 토지•건축물의 평가액 합계(제27조 제5항 각 호에해당하는토지 및 같은 조 제7항에 해당하는 건축물의 평가액 합계를 제외한다)｝ x 100

(5) The value of rights referred to in paragraph (4) 1 shall be calculated as follows:

Amount of rights = pro rata ratio = Value of land and buildings before land substitution

Article 27 (Standards for Replotting Plans)

(1) Any implementer shall, when he/she prepares a replotting plan under Article 28 (1) of the Act (hereinafter referred to as "land substitution plan"), prepare a land substitution plan by station (referring to the scope of an urban development zone in which an urban development project is implemented by the land substitution method, and where an urban development zone is divided into at least two project implementation districts under Article 5 (1) 3 of the Act, referring to each divided project implementation district; hereinafter the same shall apply) and shall comprehensively take into account the matters authorized for the implementation plan, the extent of the market value of the land substitution plan zone, the current status of the utilization of land

(2) Land substitution methods shall be classified as follows: < Amended by Act No. 11386, Mar. 30, 2012>

1. Land substitution: Transferring the right to land before replotting to land created through an urban development project;

2. Multi-level replotting: Moving land or buildings (excluding unauthorized buildings) before replotting to a sectional building constructed through an urban development project pursuant to Article 32 of the Act.

(3) In principle, the replotting design shall be in the appraisal formula (referring to the method of determining replotting in proportion to the appraised value of land before and after the implementation of an urban development project; hereinafter the same shall apply), but in cases where the alteration of land is insignificant or simple rearrangement of infrastructure, etc. is conducted due to the designation of replotting, the replotting formula (referring to the method of determining replotting in accordance with the standards for land and location before and after the implementation of an urban development project; hereinafter the same shall apply) may be applied. In such cases, the same method shall be applied to one replotting plan zone and in cases where multi-level replotting is implemented,

(4) The replotting location shall be determined by an implementer, taking into consideration the following matters. In such cases, replotting of land or buildings shall be conducted in the same replotting plan zone: < Amended by Act No. 11386, Mar. 30,

1. Land substitution: It shall be determined in consideration of the use, holding period, location, amount of rights, scale of liquidation amount, etc. of the land before land substitution;

2. Multi-level replotting: It shall be determined at the request of landowners, etc., but where the same details are at least two applications, it shall be determined in consideration of the period of holding land or buildings before replotting, residence period (limited to the supply of housing), amount of rights, etc.

(5) All land in a land substitution planning zone shall be liquidated in cash when it is designated as land substitution or is excluded from land entitled to land substitution under Articles 30 and 31 of the Act. In such cases, any of the following land shall be determined as land substitution for other land: < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 23685, Mar. 30,

1. Land gratuitously reverted to any project implementer under Article 66 (1) and (2) of the Act;

2. Land owned by an implementer (excluding land owned by an implementer, other than a cooperative, for the purpose of designating a substitute lot).

(6) Land (including shares of land falling under the right to use a site (limited to cases of ownership) under subparagraph 6 of Article 2 of the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings) or a building (including the part of a building falling under the sectional ownership under subparagraph 1 of Article 2 of the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings) shall be substituted by lots and by buildings. In such cases, the land and buildings under the same ownership of one site shall not be separately designated as multi-level replotting. < Amended by Act No. 11386, Mar.

(7) Where flat replotting is applied, buildings on land prior to replotting which are relocated or removed at the time of a replotting disposition, or buildings on land prior to replotting which are not subject to multi-level replotting, shall be obstacles under Article 38 of the Act.

Compensation for losses under Article 65 of the Act shall be made in consideration of water, etc.

(8) Any implementer may, upon receiving an application from at least two landowners or building owners for under-land, etc. referred to in Article 62 of the Decree, designate replotting as co-owned land or sectional buildings after replotting. In such cases, no implementer designated replotting shall obtain designation of other replotting.

(9) A project implementer may designate a substitute lot as a co-ownership upon application by at least two landowners with respect to a parcel of land planned to construct a building falling under the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings.

(10) Any implementer may designate replotting to one land or building after replotting for at least two land or building owned by the same person before or after replotting.

(11) Any implementer may designate replotting (hereafter referred to as "divided replotting" in this Act) for two or more parcels of land or divided buildings after replotting. In such cases, the area of each right to be designated as a divided replotting shall exceed the size of land under Article 62 of the Decree.

(12) Notwithstanding paragraph (11), no land share which is harmful to the right to use a site under subparagraph 6 of Article 2 of the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings shall be divided land substitution.

(13) Any implementer shall, when he/she amends a replotting plan under Article 29 (2) of the Act, comply with the methods and standards as at the time of the replotting plan: Provided, That the same shall not apply where it is impossible to follow the initial methods and standards on the grounds of changes in the replotting plan zone, etc.

(14) In addition to the matters prescribed in paragraphs (1) through (12), the standards for preparing a replotting plan shall be prescribed by the regulations, articles of association, or the Enforcement Rules prescribed by the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport.

Article 28 (Standards, etc. for Determination of Defermentd Land)

(1) A reserved land under Article 28 (5) of the Act shall be determined according to authorization of an implementation plan pursuant to Article 17 of the Act, but business expenses and reserved land shall be appropriated for each replotting plan zone if an urban development zone is divided into at least two replotting planning zones

(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if deemed necessary to implement an urban development project by combined development under Article 3-2 (1) of the Act or by mixed use under Article 43 (1) 3 of the Decree or to take into account the scale of infrastructure, geographical conditions, characteristics of projects, etc., the land substitution plan zone may be allocated by adjusting revenues from sale of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay or project funds,

4. Designation of collective land substitution in Chapter III of the former Urban Development Service Guidelines (established by Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs Directive No. 2009-349, Aug. 21, 2009)

4-3-1. Where necessary to construct multi-family housing defined in subparagraph 2 of Article 2 of the Housing Act or national housing defined in subparagraph 3 of the same Article;

may designate a collective land substitution.

4-3-2. A proposer or implementer shall notify in writing landowners within a development zone of the development plan for a period of 60 days prior to the formulation of the development plan so that landowners may apply for the designation of a collective replotting, and shall receive an application.

4-3. The implementer may select a person eligible for collective land substitution in accordance with the method of drawing lots if the area applied pursuant to the provisions of 4-3-2.

4-3-4. The implementer shall notify in writing the applicant of the results of 4-3.

4-3-5. If a landowner who has received a collective land substitution in order to facilitate the construction of multi-family housing under the rules and the implementation of the rules makes an unreasonable assertion to the construction company, such as a request for high-priced purchase or construction rights, the implementer shall prepare and reflect the preventive measures in advance.

/ Urban Development Service Guidelines

Part III Designation of Collective Land Substitution

4-3-1. References to Deletion

4-3-2. A project implementer shall give written notice to landowners within a development zone of a land substitution plan within a fixed period not exceeding 60 days before the preparation of the land substitution plan to enable landowners to apply for the designation of a collective land substitution plan;

4-3. Where the area of land for which an application for collective replotting has been filed is more than the area of replotting, the implementer may select land subject to collective replotting in the order of higher area of rights.

4-3-4. The implementer shall notify in writing the applicant of the results of 4-3.

4-3-5. In order to achieve the use and development of collective land substitution, the implementer shall provide active support, such as convening a land owner, arranging a contractor, etc., if requested by a majority of land owners designated as collective land substitution.

【Defendant’s Articles of Incorporation

Article 39 (Measures for Collective Land Substitution)

(1) Land designated as a collective land substitution may be sold or used through consultation between the owners of land by demarcated land.

(2) Where a project operator fails to facilitate the construction of multi-family housing due to the delay between landowners, he/she shall make the use of land smooth by changing the land from the place designated for replotting to the settlement of land to the settlement of land, with consent of at least 2/3 of the collective land substitution area by demarcated land and the consent of at least 1/2 of the landowners

(3) The land liquidated in money under the provisions of paragraph (2) shall be liquidated in accordance with the provisions of Article 43.