1. To dismiss the instant lawsuit that has been changed in exchange at the trial;

2. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The reasoning for the court's explanation on this part is that "(h)" in the whole part of the judgment of the court of first instance, which states that "The defendant shall be determined as a person subject to cash settlement because the plaintiff did not make a lawful application for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out, and after the head of Seongbuk-gu on March 18, 2016, approved the relevant plan from the head of Seongbuk-gu and publicly notified it on March 24, 2016. The head of Seongbuk-gu Office publicly notified it on March 24, 2016." Thus, this part is identical to the corresponding part, and this part is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff's argument (amended in exchange for the trial) is not sufficient to notify the defendant of the application for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out, but the disposition of this case, which is based on the premise that the plaintiff did not make a lawful application for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out due to

3. The revocation suit against the changed administrative disposition shall be filed within 90 days after the date the disposition became known, and shall not be filed after one year from the date the disposition becomes known (Article 20(1) and (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act). In a case where the previous lawsuit is withdrawn and the new lawsuit is changed to be instituted, compliance with the period for filing a lawsuit against the new lawsuit shall, in principle, be determined at the time when the lawsuit is changed.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Du7023 Decided November 25, 2004, etc.). However, according to the above basic facts, the instant disposition was deemed to have existed prior to March 18, 2016, which was the authorization date of the instant disposition, at the latest. However, the Plaintiff submitted an application for modification of the purport and cause of the claim as of March 14, 2018, which was much more than one year thereafter.