All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant, including the part arising from the supplementary participation.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In full view of the relevant provisions, including Article 43(1) and (2) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, Articles 2(1), 5, 29, and 30 of the Regulations on the Determination Structure and Standards for Installation of Urban/Gun Planning Facilities, Articles 6 and 12(1) and (6) of the Parking Lot Act, and Articles 5, 6, and 7-2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Parking Lot Act, when formulating and determining an urban/Gun management plan for the installation of an off-road parking lot (hereinafter referred to as “parking lot installation plan”) which is an infrastructure to achieve the objectives of parking administration, the administrative body has a relatively wide discretion to determine the necessity and details of the plan according to its professional, technical, and policy decisions. Since an urban/Gun management plan requires a long-term and comprehensive nature in the relevant urban/Gun management plan, it may determine whether it is necessary to install an off-road parking lot, comprehensively taking into account the demand for parking at the time of formulating and determining the plan for installation of the relevant area, future demand for parking, use of the use of the relevant area

However, the discretion of the administrative body to form an off-road parking lot to determine the necessity of the off-road parking lot and its specific contents is not unlimited, but it is reasonable to establish the off-road parking lot only when the public interest to be achieved by establishing the off-road parking lot is superior to the other public interest restricted by it or the private interest infringed by it.

In particular, in cases where a large number of existing houses should be removed in the process of implementing public works rather than efficiently improving old and inferior houses, it is not merely a restriction of property rights, but also a collective restriction of housing rights, which is a very important fundamental right. Therefore, to justify this, it is necessary for the important public interest in the relevant public works.