1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. All plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit shall be the supplementary participation.

I. The following facts are acknowledged in light of the overall purport of arguments in the statements in Gap's 1 to 4, Eul's 3, 4, 6, and 7 for the authorization of the establishment of a housing redevelopment project association:

[1] The Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Promotion Committee for the Establishment of Housing Redevelopment Project Cooperatives (hereinafter “B Area Promotion Committee”) aimed at establishing a housing redevelopment project in the area of a housing redevelopment project in the area of 42,637.45 square meters and over which the Defendant obtained approval of the promotion committee on August 26, 2005.

After that, on November 29, 2007, the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City publicly announced the "Determination of an urban renewal acceleration plan" under the Special Act on the Promotion of Urban Renewal.

(Public Notice D). In the above Public Notice D., the Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E-Japan E 76,790 square meters (hereinafter “instant area”) including the above 42,637.45 square meters was designated as the “AF promotion zone” which is the renewal promotion zone for the housing redevelopment project.

After that, on April 4, 2008, the promotion committee for Zone B was approved by the defendant to change the company's "Establishment Promotion Committee for Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Projects of the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Projects" (hereinafter "Promotion Committee of this case") for the purpose of establishing a housing redevelopment project in the zone of this case.

[2] After receiving a written consent to establish an association from the owners of the land, etc. in the instant zone (hereinafter “instant written consent”), the instant promotion committee held an inaugural general meeting of the Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s “AFF Promotion Zone Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association” (hereinafter “instant association”) on July 4, 2008

At the above inaugural general meeting, the articles of association of the association of this case was resolved, and the promotion committee of this case applied for authorization to establish the association of this case to the defendant on July 15, 2008.

On October 7, 2008, the Defendant recognized that the consent of 432 owners of the land, etc. of the instant zone (76.19%) was obtained from 567 owners of the land, etc., and authorizing the establishment of the instant association under the Urban and Residential Environment Improvement Act (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).