1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit, the part pertaining to the participation in the litigation is the intervenor joining the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a maintenance and improvement project association established for the purpose of promoting the housing redevelopment project of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (hereinafter “instant project”), and the Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) are owners of lands, etc. located within the instant project zone.

B. The Defendant carried out the instant project as follows.

In order to revise a project implementation plan on October 23, 201, which was approved on October 24, 201 for the establishment of a project implementation plan on June 25, 2009, on December 28, 201, for the establishment of a project implementation plan on December 28, 201 for the establishment of a project implementation plan on October 23, 201, the approval of a management and disposition plan on April 24, 201 for the formulation of a project implementation plan on November 7, 2013 for the amendment of a project implementation plan on December 27, 2013 (hereinafter “instant management and disposition plan”).

C. At present, the Defendant is currently running the removal work of the buildings within the instant project zone, and is still bringing an action against union members and cash clearingors who do not order the land and buildings to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 5, 14, 15, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8 through 11, and 16, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiffs and intervenors 1) The Defendant did not notify the partners of the outlined particulars of the charges at the time of application for parcelling-out, and thus, the instant management and disposal plan is also null and void. 2) Although the Defendant notified the union members of the scale of the union members’ burden, etc. one month before the date of holding a general meeting for formulating a management and disposal plan (the December 27, 2013) in writing, the Defendant did not notify the Plaintiff B of the outlined particulars of the charges to be borne by the first patrolman on December 2013, and thus, the instant management and disposal plan is null and void.

3. The defendant submits a management and disposition plan to an extraordinary general meeting to formulate a management and disposition plan on December 27, 2013.