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.

The reasons alleged by the plaintiffs in the first instance court while filing an appeal are not different from the contents alleged by the plaintiffs in the first instance court, and the first instance court's rejection of the plaintiffs' claims is justified even if the evidence submitted in the first instance court is reviewed together with the allegations by the plaintiffs.

Therefore, this court's reasoning is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the part modified as follows. Thus, this court shall accept it in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary part] Article 17 of the judgment of the court of first instance asserts that there is a defect in the designation of an urban renewal acceleration zone unless the E area does not fall under the "where the worn-out and inferior housing and buildings are concentrated and require the improvement of residential environment and the maintenance of infrastructure," which is the requirement for designation of an urban renewal acceleration district under Article 6 (2) 1 of the former Urban Renewal Act. However, as examined later, the E area has at least the requirements for designation of an urban renewal acceleration zone under Article 10 (1) [Attachment Table 1] subparagraph 4 (a) and 2 (a) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Urban Renewal Act. Accordingly, the E area falls under the case where the designation of an urban renewal acceleration district is clearly required for the efficient use of land and the recovery of urban functions such as the downtown or the dishonor of land, etc., which is the designation requirements of an urban renewal acceleration district under Article 6 (2) 2 of the former Urban Renewal Act."

Article 26 and Article 27 (1) 1 of the former Urban Renewal Act provide that the judgment of the first instance court shall not be included in the second instance, and then, the infrastructure installed in accordance with the urban renewal acceleration plan shall be included in the second instance.