1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiffs are co-owners who own 1/4 shares of D forest 38,048 square meters (hereinafter “the instant land”) in Namyang-si, Namyang-si.

B. On November 15, 2007, the Dongyang Construction Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Dongyang Construction Industry”) obtained approval from the Defendant for a housing construction project plan that sets up approximately KRW 1,275,00 square meters of E site, namely, about KRW 85,40 square meters of E site, and at the time, approximately KRW 113,800 square meters of land, including the above project site and the neighboring green park in the above project site (as stated in the attached Form G apartment, the remaining apartment, and the part on the original park in the above drawing), including approximately 12,440 square meters, were determined as the Class 1 district unit plan.

C. The Defendant, on October 15, 2009, cancelled the Gun Park Zone on approximately 224 lots including the instant land on the grounds of the landscape improvement on the building site scattered in the day of the instant land, the necessity of securing resident resting facilities, and the connection with the natural environment conservation area (H Gun Park), and on October 15, 2009, revoked the Gun Park Zone on approximately 253,000 square meters, including the instant land, and on April 5, 2010, on September 8, 2010, pursuant to the draft of the urban management planning planning planning formulated on April 5, 2010, the Defendant: (a) on September 8, 2010, instead of the existing neighboring park, designated a neighboring park (including a part of the instant land), the neighboring park (a F apartment-dong park located in the relevant drawing, a neighboring park (a neighboring park), the public announcement (hereinafter “instant urban management plan”) and the designation of a project implementer as an implementation plan for the said urban management plan (hereinafter referred to as a project implementer).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2-3, Eul evidence 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

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

A. The plaintiffs' assertion (1) of this case.