1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are all the plaintiffs, including the costs incurred by the supplementary participation.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiffs are the owners of each household, who are multi-family housing (multi-family housing) and neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter referred to as the "officetel of this case") in Gyeyang-gu, Gyeyang-gu and most of them are residing in the officetel of this case.

B. On December 4, 2014, the Defendant Intervenor filed an application for a construction permit with the content of newly constructing a reinforced concrete structure (site size 2,159.4 square meters, building area 753.15 square meters, total floor area 4,182.72 square meters, and usage: Educational research facilities, cultural and assembly facilities, etc.; hereinafter “instant building”) on the height-gu C (hereinafter “instant site”) adjacent to the instant officetel, which is located on January 2015. The Defendant permitted the instant building on January 20, 2015.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). C.

The instant officetel site and the instant site are designated as a central commercial area pursuant to the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, and the construction of Class II neighborhood living facilities, cultural and assembly facilities, and educational and research facilities, etc. is permitted as a site for E under the previous district unit planning (the same as the following, hereinafter referred to as “instant planning”) determined and publicly notified by the Defendant, as the land for E in the previous district unit planning No. 1 (d) as determined and publicly notified by the Defendant. However, the construction of religious facilities

On October 2, 2015, when the instant lawsuit was pending, the Defendant revised and publicly notified the instant plan to allow the construction of religious facilities on the E form including the instant site.

On October 20, 2015, the Defendant’s assistant intervenor filed an application for change of construction permission to change the use of the instant building to educational research facilities and religious facilities, and the Defendant permitted such change on January 4, 2016.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant change”) . [The ground for recognition] No dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 4, 7, and 8 (including evidence attached with serial numbers)

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. The plaintiffs' assertion is based on the National Land Planning and Utilization Act.