1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

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

1. The reasoning for this part of the disposition is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following portions which are dismissed or added by the court. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The 2nd 8th son of the first instance judgment “Plaintiff” shall be deemed “A”.

The head of the Government's National Land Management Office of the defendant shall be appointed as the head of the Seoul Regional Construction Management Office" in the 2nd sentence of the judgment of the first instance.

The second 13 to 14 pages of the judgment of the court of first instance (the permission number: C; hereinafter referred to as the "permission number of the road occupation and use of this case") are as follows: "Permission number of the road occupation and use of this case (the permission number): C; hereinafter referred to as the "permission of the road occupation and use of this case")".

The 3rd page of the judgment of the first instance court (hereinafter “instant implementation plan”) is the same as “(the part concerning the instant land in the instant implementation plan’s authorization disposition)” (hereinafter “instant implementation plan’s authorization disposition”).

The following shall be added at the third five pages of the judgment of the first instance:

“A died on March 23, 2019, while the instant lawsuit was pending, and the Plaintiffs, who were the spouse and children of A, succeeded to the instant lawsuit.”

2. The reasoning for the judgment on this part of the judgment on the main safety defense by the defendant Pyeong-gun is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except where the "Plaintiff" in the 3th 11,18 of the judgment of the first instance is deemed to be "the plaintiff," and thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The summary of the plaintiffs' assertion 1) The permission to change the occupation and use of the road of this case (connection) made by the head of the Seoul Regional Construction and Management Administration without the consent of the plaintiffs, the owner of the land of this case, is unlawful in violation of Article 52 (2) of the Road Act.