1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit, the part pertaining to the participation by the Intervenor is the remainder.

1. According to Article 54(1) and (2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents as to the legitimacy of a lawsuit in this case, a project executor who implements a housing redevelopment project shall, without delay, notify the purchaser of the matters determined by the management and disposal plan through the land confirmation survey and the land division procedure, and transfer the ownership of the site or structure to the purchaser, and shall publicly notify the details thereof

In addition, it is reasonable to interpret that there is no legal interest in seeking cancellation or invalidity confirmation of a project implementation plan, project implementation plan, project implementation approval, management and disposal plan and management plan.

[See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Du6400 Decided March 22, 2012, and Supreme Court Decision 2012Du26197, 2012Du26203, Oct. 15, 2015, etc.] According to the overall purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor, after filing the instant lawsuit, announced transfer of the instant housing redevelopment project, and became effective around that time by the Plaintiff’s Intervenor on June 8, 2016.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, since the plaintiffs have no legal interest in seeking confirmation of invalidity of the project implementation authorization of this case.

2. Therefore, the instant lawsuit is dismissed, and the part pertaining to the participation in the litigation costs is assessed against the Plaintiff’s Intervenor, and the remainder is assessed against the Plaintiffs who lost. It is so decided as per Disposition.