1. All of the lawsuits of the plaintiff A, B, and C shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff D's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant is the executor of the H waterfront development project (hereinafter “instant project”), which is promoted in Busan Gangseo-gu, F, Gwon 11,885,000 square meters, and the Plaintiffs are the owners of buildings located in the instant project area.

B. On July 12, 2012, the head of Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan Government announced the residents’ public inspection for inspection (hereinafter “instant public announcement”) to designate H waterfronts, and the Defendant publicly announced the compensation plan on May 16, 2013, which is the date of the instant public announcement on the base date for relocation measures on May 16, 2013, the date of the instant public announcement.

C. The Plaintiffs sold the building owned by the Defendant on the date of concluding the contract indicated below.

Plaintiff

In the case of A, M was based on the sale date of M.

The building owned by the Plaintiff in the order of the Plaintiff shall be referred to as the “building.”

Plaintiff

On January 13, 2014, the date of acquisition of ownership of a parcel number located in a building A, a building unregistered I of Gangseo-gu A, Busan Metropolitan Government on January 13, 2014, JG on December 13, 2013, Gangseo-gu, Busan, Gangseo-gu, Busan on December 14, 2013, D Busan on December 5, 2013, D Busan Gangseo-gu L on December 22, 1994.

On June 30, 2015, the Plaintiffs filed an application for the selection of a person subject to relocation measures with the Defendant. On June 30, 2015, the Defendant decided to exclude the Plaintiff from the person subject to relocation measures as “non-conformity with the requirements for household houses (unauthorized buildings) and the requirements for ownership (transfer by acquisition by transfer prior to the relevant base date),” Plaintiff B as “non-conformity with the requirements for continuous residence (Evidence of Actual Residence),” and Plaintiff C as “non-conformity with the requirements for continuous residence (Evidence of Actual Residence),” respectively, and on September 8, 2015, Plaintiff D was excluded from the person subject to relocation measures.”

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) e.

Plaintiff

A filed an objection on July 29, 2015, Plaintiff B, July 7, 2015, and Plaintiff C, July 14, 2015, respectively, but was dismissed on September 8, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 3-1, Eul evidence 9-1, 2, and Eul evidence 34.