1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant is a housing redevelopment development and rearrangement project association established with authorization from the head of Seo-gu Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “head of Seo-gu”) to implement housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”) on the area of 72,313 m2,313 m2 of Seo-gu Busan Metropolitan City H, and the Plaintiffs are the owners of land and obstacles located within the rearrangement zone in the instant case.

B. On September 24, 2017, the Defendant held an extraordinary general meeting (hereinafter “instant extraordinary meeting”) and deliberated and resolved on the agenda items of subparagraphs 1 through 9, including “an amendment of the articles of association,” “an amendment of the items of subparagraph 2,” “a case of approval of the management and disposition plan (draft),” “a case of obtaining funds, the method, interest rate, and a case of resolution of repayment method” as referred to in subparagraph 6.

C. The Defendant formulated a management and disposition plan (hereinafter “instant management and disposition plan”) in accordance with the resolution of the agenda under subparagraph 3 at the special meeting of this case, and applied for authorization of the instant management and disposition plan to the head of the Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan City on October 16, 2017 and obtained the authorization on November 14, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 1, 3, 4, Eul evidence 1 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the management and disposal plan of this case is legitimate

A. The management and disposition plan of this case asserted by the plaintiffs is invalid for the following reasons.

1) The authorization of the first project implementation plan was invalidated after the expiration of the project implementation period stipulated in the first project implementation plan on June 1, 2012. Therefore, the approval of the first project implementation plan was unlawful on the premise that the approval of the invalidated project implementation plan is valid. 2) The change of the project implementation plan approved by the head of ideas on January 26, 2017 is in the first project implementation plan.