1. The Defendant’s management and disposal plan approved by the head of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on May 1, 2017 is the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association established to implement the housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”) in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the Plaintiff was the owner of the land, etc. located in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Site and Housing within the said project area.

B. The Defendant obtained authorization for the implementation of the project on July 30, 2012 from the head of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “the head of Eunpyeong-gu”) and authorization for the implementation of the project on June 26, 2014, respectively.

C. On June 30, 2014, the Defendant issued a public announcement of the application for parcelling-out by setting the period for application for parcelling-out from July 7, 2014 to September 4, 2014, and issued a public announcement of the application for parcelling-out on September 5, 2014 by extending the period for application for parcelling-out from September 5, 2014 to September 24, 2014.

On September 24, 2016, the Defendant approved the management and disposition plan (hereinafter “instant management and disposition plan”) from the head of Eunpyeong-gu, on May 1, 2017, after adopting a resolution at the general meeting of the members of the association.

E. The instant management and disposition plan is classified by the Plaintiff as the subject of cash settlement.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. As to the plaintiff's claim seeking confirmation of invalidity of the management and disposal plan of this case, the defendant asserts that there is no legal interest in seeking confirmation of invalidity of the management and disposal plan of this case, since the plaintiff did not file an application for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out

In this case, the facts that the plaintiff is classified as the subject of cash liquidation are as shown in the preceding disposition process.

However, the plaintiff did not notify the plaintiff of all the application for parcelling-out, and therefore, the plaintiff did not know of the contents of the application for parcelling-out.