The first instance court dismissed all of the part of the defendant's claim for nullification and cancellation of the company's selection of an agro-industrial complex against the intervenors, and dismissed all of the part of the plaintiff's claim for confirmation of invalidity of the primary claimant among the claims for the contract for occupancy of each two agricultural and industrial complex concluded by the defendant with the intervenors.

With respect to this, only the defendant appealed the part against him, but the court prior to the remand dismissed the defendant's appeal.

With respect to this, only the defendant appealed against his losing part, and the appellate court accepted the defendant's appeal and reversed the judgment of the party before remand and remanded to the trial court after remanding.

Therefore, the scope of this court's trial is limited to the part that was reversed and remanded by the court of final appeal, i.e., the defendant's claim for cancellation of the preliminary claimant among the claims for the contract for occupancy

2. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 3, 1986, the Defendant designated the area of 66,857 square meters in Ansan-si as B-Industrial Complex (hereinafter “instant agro-industrial complex”) with the approval of the Mayor/Do Governor of the Gyeong-dong-si. In the instant agro-industrial complex, 12 enterprises, such as machinery and electricity, electronic commerce, etc., are currently located in the instant agro-industrial complex.

The plaintiff is the owner of D's land directly adjacent to the agro-industrial complex of this case, and is residing on the ground.

B. On July 2012, the Intervenor filed an application with the Defendant, who is the authorized administrator (management agency) under Articles 30(1) and 38(1) of the former Industrial Cluster Development and Factory Establishment Act (amended by Act No. 11690, Mar. 23, 2013; hereinafter “former Industrial Cluster Act”).

The defendant.