All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 28(1) of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act (amended by Act No. 10599, Apr. 14, 2011; hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) provides that when the head of a Si/Gun formulates an urban management plan, he/she shall hear the opinions of residents unless it falls under a case of a minor matter prescribed by Presidential Decree in the proviso to Article 28(1), and shall reflect such opinions in the relevant urban management plan if deemed reasonable. Article 28(2) and (3) of the same Act provides that where a project plan formulated by the Do Governor, who is a person entitled to decide on an urban management plan, directly prepares the relevant urban management plan pursuant to Article 24(6) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, the head of the relevant Si/Gun shall send the draft urban management plan to the head of the relevant Si/Gun to hear the opinions of residents and submit the result thereof to the Do Governor by the deadline.

In addition, Article 22(5) of the former Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 23718, Apr. 10, 2012; hereinafter “Enforcement Decree”) provides that in cases where a Mayor/Do Governor or the head of a Si/Gun intends to reflect his/her opinion on the draft of an urban management plan publicly announced in the draft of an urban management plan pursuant to delegation of Article 28(4) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, if the content thereof is an important matter prescribed by the urban planning ordinance of the relevant Si/Gun, he/she shall again

When the above national land planning statutes have the competent administrative agency publicly announce and peruse the contents of the relevant urban management plan to residents when formulating an urban management plan, the interests of many interested parties.