The part of the lower judgment against the Plaintiff B, C, D, E, and H is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

A. (1) According to the reasoning of the first instance judgment cited by the lower court, the Defendant is the implementer of housing redevelopment project in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”), and the Plaintiffs were the owners of land and buildings located within the instant rearrangement project zone, ② the period for application for parcelling-out on July 13, 2012 to August 12, 2012, and announced the application for parcelling-out to the extent of 30 days from July 13, 2012 to August 12, 2012, and the Defendant issued an application for parcelling-out to the Defendant for parcelling-out 13 to the extent of 30 days from August 13, 2012 to August 26, 2012. The Plaintiffs did not apply for parcelling-out to the Defendant for parcelling-out 1 to the extent of 150 days from the expiration of the period for application for parcelling-out, 20 days from the date of application for parcelling-out, 30 days from August 26, 2012.

(2) Based on the foregoing factual basis, the lower court is deemed to be the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents before being amended by Act No. 12116, Dec. 24, 2013; hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).

Article 47.