1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiffs are the owners of each road of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Cdong (hereinafter “Cdong”) D and E (hereinafter “instant road”).

The road of this case is connected to the seven parcels of F, G, H, I, J, K, and L. Of the above land, K, L and its ground buildings are owned by the plaintiffs.

B. On June 2017, the Plaintiffs removed the existing buildings on K and L ground, and thereafter filed an application for a building permit with the Defendant to construct the building by including the instant road into the relevant site.

On June 29, 2017, the Defendant rejected the application for the above building permit on the ground that “the instant road is recognized as a road under the Building Act, and thus, the building permit for the first existing building was disposed of, and thus, should be excluded from the site of the application.”

(hereinafter referred to as “previous return of building permit”). (c)

On August 23, 2017, the Plaintiffs filed an application for the disuse of a road with the Defendant pursuant to Articles 2 and 45(2) of the Building Act, on the ground that “The scope of the surrounding lands adjacent to the instant road is adjacent to another road, and even if the instant road is abolished, there is no obstacle to the use of the surrounding land, and that there is no interested party because the owners of surrounding lands recognize the exclusive right to use the instant road or deny the use thereof.”

On August 31, 2017, the Defendant applied for the abolition of the road designated under Article 2 subparag. 11(b) of the Building Act, and demanded the Plaintiffs to supplement it by September 15, 2017, stating that “The instant road is designated as a road under the Building Act, and it is not possible to verify the fact that it was designated as a road under the Building Act.”

The Plaintiffs, on September 5, 2017, shall submit to the Defendant a written reply to the purport that “No confirmation is made about the designation of the instant road as a road through any procedure, and no confirmation is made about the submission of any material.”