1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant is a housing reconstruction and rearrangement project association established with the approval of establishment from the head of Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on February 19, 2010 to implement a housing reconstruction and rearrangement project with the Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G G group as an improvement zone.

The plaintiffs are the owners of the sections of the second floor and the relevant site shares among the four commercial buildings located in the defendant's rearrangement zone (Ga through Ddong), and are the members of the defendant's association.

B. The Defendant received project implementation authorization from the head of Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on July 25, 2012, and received an appraisal of the previous asset value from the appraisal corporation of the corporation and the first appraisal corporation on the date of appraisal as the date of appraisal of the project implementation authorization.

C. After formulating a management and disposal plan based on the value of the above previous assets, the Defendant held a general meeting of partners on May 30, 2015 and resolved on a management and disposal plan (draft), and received a management and disposal plan from the head of Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on November 12, 2015.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant management and disposition plan”), . [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings.

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

A. The plaintiffs' assertion 1) Commercial buildings owned by the plaintiffs are the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter "Aggregate Buildings Act").

It is not an aggregate building that has been constructed before this enforcement, and there is a separate registration of the site and the ground buildings.

In this case, the building site and the building site should be evaluated and added respectively, rather than the entire evaluation of the building site and the building site. If the owner of the first floor and the second floor are the same as the owner of the second floor, the appraised value of the building site owned by the owner of the second floor and the owner of the second floor should also be the same.

However, the defendant requested the assessment of the previous assets.