1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a redevelopment and maintenance project association established pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) for the purpose of implementing a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant project”) in Seongdong-gu Seoul Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Zone C, and the Defendant is an urban gas business operator who supplies urban gas to the area within the instant project zone.

B. On March 5, 2014, the Plaintiff refers to the Defendant’s remaining value-added cost of the gas pipeline (hereinafter “instant gas pipeline”) within the instant business zone, and the relocation of pipes to enable the Defendant to continuously supply gas to residents outside the instant business zone, who were supplied with the gas via the gas pipeline.

On April 23, 2014, the Defendant requested for the calculation of the cost of the instant gas pipeline. On April 23, 2014, the Defendant calculated the remainder value cost of the instant gas pipeline as KRW 33,975,40, and the waste pipe removal and piping removal cost as KRW 379,549,50, and claimed KRW 713,524,90 in total.

C. On August 11, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 713,524,90 to the Defendant for the remaining value expenses, etc. of the instant gas pipelines.

Meanwhile, within an apartment complex newly constructed by the Plaintiff in the course of implementing the instant project, the user supply pipes [in the case of supplying urban gas to multi-family housing, etc., referring to pipes from the boundary of land owned or occupied by the gas user to the front valves of the measuring instrument installed on the outer wall of the building (in the case of the measuring instrument installed inside the building, the outer wall of the building) owned or occupied by the gas user; hereinafter “new gas pipeline of this case”) were newly installed. The costs of installing the new gas pipeline of this case were

E. The statutes pertaining to the instant case are as follows:

Article 2 of the former Urban Improvement Act (Amended by Act No. 13508, Sep. 1, 2015; hereinafter the same shall apply) (Definitions)

4...