1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by this Court is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the part which was written by the court under Paragraph 2 below, and thus, it shall be 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. Parts 7 9 to 12 of the 7th decision of the first instance court shall be written by the following parts:

Construction of a road that is implemented by the plaintiff as the traffic improvement charges in this case is not necessary (construction of a road that is implemented by the plaintiff as the traffic improvement charges in this case requires a separate procedure for urban planning change since it is not required to maintain a separate procedure because it is a separate urban planning change because it is 27m since there is no change in the area of the previous sexual bridge main line, there is only a increase in the area of the road due to the construction of the sidewalk main line, there is only 35m in the report of the urban planning facility, the width of the road on the topographical map is 32m in the report of the urban planning facility.

(2) In order to confirm whether the procedure for urban planning modification is necessary in implementing the Sungdong Interconnection Construction, the Plaintiff applied for an inquiry to the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, and this court adopted it and made an inquiry to the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, and thereafter withdrawn a reply to the inquiry of fact to the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport as the response to the inquiry was not arrived by the date of the closing of argument in the court. However, the response to the fact inquiry applied by the Plaintiff from the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport on June 8, 2013, which was after the closing of argument. Accordingly, it is clearly clear that the Sungdong Interdong Expansion Construction is not subject to an urban planning facility’s determination on urban management

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the court of first instance shall dismiss it.