1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 23, 2005, the Defendant publicly announced the housing site development project (hereinafter “instant project”) to execute the housing site development project B, and publicly announced the residents’ public inspection of the planned housing site development area.

B. After June 10, 2014, the Defendant sent a notice of compensation to the person subject to the measures for relocation of the instant project. According to the foregoing guidance, the person subject to the measures for relocation is divided into those subject to the measures for special supply of housing sites, those subject to the measures for relocation, and those subject to the measures for relocation are determined as “persons who own a house before one year prior to the date of public announcement of the measures for relocation, and have resided in the house before the date of conclusion or ruling of expropriation of the compensation contract, and who have been relocated due to the implementation of the project after receiving compensation from the project operator.” The person subject to the special supply of housing was determined as “persons who have continuously owned the house and resided in the house before the date of public announcement of the compensation contract for relocation ( December 23, 2005) and who have given compensation for the said house by the project operator after receiving compensation for the said house from the project operator, and those who have waived their right to receive the special supply of the housing site or the settlement funds for relocation.”

C. The Plaintiff owned and resided in Pyeongtaek-si C Ground Housing (hereinafter “instant housing”) within the instant business area, and had been expropriated and relocated to the said land and housing due to the instant business, and applied for the Defendant to select himself as a person subject to relocation measures (person subject to relocation measures).

On July 10, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that he was selected as a person eligible for special supply of housing who is not a person eligible for migrants’ housing site (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] There is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5 through 8, Eul evidence No. 1.