1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders revocation below, shall be revoked.

Defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 30, 2015, the Plaintiff sold to C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.), the implementer of the B apartment construction project, for KRW 563,00,000, the share of KRW 620,000,000,000 among the 85,00,000,000,000,000,000,000 won for KRW 1/13,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won for forest land owned by the Plaintiff.

B. On October 30, 2015, the Seosan City Mayor issued a public notice of approval for the housing construction project plan (hereinafter “public notice of approval for the instant project plan”) under Article 16(8) of the former Housing Act (wholly amended by Act No. 13805, Jan. 19, 2016) since the project plan for the construction of the Seosan apartment (hereinafter “the instant project plan”) that the non-party company is scheduled to implement on the non-party I and the non-party 32 parcels was approved.

C. In the public notice of approval of the instant project plan, the Seosan City listed “the determination of urban management planning (unit planning), the designation of the implementor of the urban planning facility project, and the authorization of the implementation plan” as “the legal fiction of other Acts” in relation to the urban planning facility project (road) project for creating infrastructure for the instant multi-family housing site” (hereinafter “instant urban planning facility project”), and listed “the matters concerning the determination of urban management planning (unit planning) and the public notice of topographic drawings, the matters concerning the designation of the implementor of the urban planning facility project, and the matters concerning the

Accordingly, in the public notice of approval of the instant project plan, the Seosan City Mayor shall determine an urban management plan (amended) regarding the district unit planning to the effect that the land, including the total land to be incorporated into the urban planning facilities as shown below, including 264.2 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) among the total land transferred by the Plaintiff, is designated as an infrastructure.