1. The plaintiffs' primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant was established for the purpose of implementing a housing reconstruction project in the Seoul Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Jung-gu (hereinafter “instant project implementation district”) and was authorized by the head of Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “head of Jung-gu”) on September 4, 2008. The Plaintiffs are owners of land, etc. in the instant project implementation district.

B. On April 20, 2013, the Defendant Union held a general meeting on the agenda of subparagraph 1 and passed a resolution on the “case of the consent to the project implementation plan” as the agenda item 1. On June 21, 2013, the Defendant Union obtained approval of the project implementation plan (hereinafter “instant project implementation plan”).

C. After that, the Defendant Union received the application for parcelling-out from August 14, 2013 to October 2, 2013 by setting the period for application for parcelling-out (hereinafter referred to as “instant application for parcelling-out”); on November 16, 2014, the Defendant Union held a general meeting on November 16, 2014 and passed a resolution for “approval of a management and disposition plan” as an agenda item 3; on January 22, 2015, obtained authorization of the management and disposition plan from the head of the Jung-gu Office (hereinafter referred to as “instant management and disposition plan”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the management and disposal plan of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiffs' assertion 1) asserts that the plaintiffs should be invalidated or revoked since there are errors as set forth in the management and disposal plan of this case. First, the defendant's application period prior to the application period for parcelling-out in this case (hereinafter "Urban Improvement Act").

In addition, the notification of the summary of charges under Paragraph 1 of Article 46 was omitted.

Second, since the maintenance project cost at the time of the application for parcelling-out and the maintenance project cost at the time of the establishment of the management and disposal plan of this case are considerably different as the following table, the management and disposal plan of this case shall be applied for parcelling-out under Article 48 (1)