1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The court's explanation concerning this case is based on the second-class judgment of the court of first instance.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to those used by the court of first instance as set forth in the following paragraph 2. Thus, it is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420

2. First of all, the part concerning the above master plan of this case ("1") and the circumstance that the defendant asserts that the designation of the rearrangement zone of this case or the project implementation plan of this case or the management and disposal plan of this case cannot be deemed unlawful, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it (the defendant and the owners of real estate within the project zone of this case filed a lawsuit claiming the cancellation of the project implementation plan of this case and the management and disposal plan of this case by asserting the above defects against the plaintiff and the remaining heads of Busan Metropolitan City, but the Supreme Court (2015du2048) rejected all the claims that the defendant et al. of this case's disposition of this case is invalid, ② procedural unlawful assertion of the resolution of the general meeting for the project implementation plan of this case, ③ unlawful application of this case's management and disposal plan of this case according to the illegal application of this case, ④ calculation of the previous asset price based on the appraisal result as of the first public notice date of approval of the project implementation plan of this case is unlawful, and even if there is no special circumstance that changed the previous project implementation plan of this case's.