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 February 10, 2017, the Plaintiff submitted a written request for ex officio cancellation of the instant rearrangement zone to the Defendant on February 10, 2017 pursuant to Article 4-3(4) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) and Article 4-3(3)4 of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Ordinance”), among 1,441 owners of land, etc., pursuant to Article 4-3(4) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Ordinance”).

(hereinafter referred to as “request for cancellation of this case”). (b)

On March 23, 2017, the Defendant: (a) number of owners of land, etc. in the instant rearrangement zone is 1,440; and (b) the details of the Plaintiff’s application are 50 persons among those consenting to the cancellation of the instant rearrangement zone; (c) as a result of the Defendant’s examination, 22 persons among the aforementioned 50 consenters should be excluded; and (d) only 478 remaining owners of land, etc. agreed to the cancellation of the instant rearrangement zone, and did not meet the consent requirement under Article 4-3(3)4 of the Ordinance on Improvement at least 33.19% of the number of owners of land, etc., and thus, rejected

(hereinafter “Disposition of this case”). 【Disposition of this case’s ground for recognition of this case’s existence of no dispute, entry of Gap’s 1 through 3 (including numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

가. 원고의 주장 아래와 같은 이유로 피고가 이 사건 정비구역의 해제에 동의하는 토지등소유자에서 제외한 22명 중 4명의 토지등소유자는 이 사건 정비구역의 해제에 동의한 것으로 보아야 하고, 그 경우 정비조례 제4조의3 제3항 제4호가 정한 토지등소유자 3분의 1 이상[33.47% ≒ (피고가 인정한 478명 추가로 인정되어야 할 4명)/1,440명]의 동의 요건을 충족함에도 이와 다른 전제에서 이루어진 이 사건 처분은 위법하므로 취소되어야...