1. The Plaintiff is subject to sale among the management and disposal plans authorized by the head of Yeongdeungpo-gu Office on March 21, 2016.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 27, 2008, the Defendant obtained authorization from the head of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office to establish an association by designating Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government project implementation potential zone as the project implementation potential zone (hereinafter “instant project zone”).

B. On September 10, 2010, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership based on the sale of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D large 36 square meters in the instant business area.

C. On February 14, 2012, the Plaintiff applied for parcelling-out to the Defendant.

On March 7, 2016, the defendant notified the plaintiff on the ground that "only if all members of the household (including the spouse of the household who is not registered in the resident registration card of the head of the household and the spouse of the household who are the same household as the spouse of the plaintiff) do not own a house" under the Seoul Metropolitan Government Ordinance on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments (hereinafter referred to as the "Ordinance of this case") (including the Ordinance of this case) on the ground that "if all members of the household (including the spouse of the head of the household and the spouse of the household who are not registered in the resident registration card of the same household as the head of the household and the head of the household do not own the same household as the spouse of the plaintiff), they shall be classified as persons subject to settlement in cash," and the management and disposal plan was authorized by the head of Yeongdeungpo-gu on March 21, 2016.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant management and disposition plan”). [This case’s management and disposition plan’s grounds for recognition] A/L without dispute, entry of Gap’s evidence 1/5, Eul’s evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The details of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes are as shown in attached statutes;

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff’s wife E, together with the Plaintiff and his/her children, was registered as the Plaintiff’s parent F and G’s domicile for the purpose of receiving childcare subsidies from the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, although he/she had resided in Bupyeong-do from July 1, 2014 to the present date. As such, the Plaintiff in the instant management and disposition plan is a seller.