1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of Pyeongtaek-si B large 407 square meters and a single-story housing on its ground, and each of the said real estate was located within the business district of the C Housing Site Development Project (hereinafter “instant project”) implemented by the Defendant and was transferred to the Defendant’s future ownership on the ground of an agreement on the land for public use.

B. On July 8, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the selection of the instant resettled housing site (housing site) as the eligible recipient. However, on April 29, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff as a result of the examination of the relocation measures for the instant project that he/she is disqualified, and the Plaintiff submitted an objection and additional explanatory materials, etc. by May 29, 2015 in writing, and sent a written statement stating that “if he/she raises an objection against the objection, he/she may file an administrative appeal or administrative litigation within 90 days from the date of receipt of the relevant notification.” The Plaintiff received the said written statement around that time.

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the Defendant on May 6, 2015, and the Defendant notified that the Plaintiff became disqualified on July 10, 2015, and the Plaintiff could file an administrative appeal or administrative litigation within 90 days from the date of receipt of the notification, if there is an objection to the result of the selection of the said relocation measures.

The Plaintiff filed a civil petition against the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission. On September 7, 2015, the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission notified the Plaintiff that the Defendant’s selection of the Plaintiff cannot be deemed improper.

In our construction work, we have reported the non-conformity of the person subject to the relocation measures as a result of the review of the eligibility of the application for the application for the thickness.

After that, the thickness raised an objection against the non-conformity in our construction, and our construction re-examines it, but there was no obvious reason to change the original non-conformity to the qualified disposition.