1. On April 4, 2018, the Defendant confirmed that the disposition of the Plaintiff to notify the Plaintiff of the unification of the proposer was null and void.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. On November 10, 201, the Plaintiff is a company established for the purpose of implementing the “B Park Development Activities Special Project” (hereinafter “Special Project”), which is developed by a private park promoter as park facilities and multi-family housing, by applying the special exception on development activities, etc. in the site of an urban park to the Incheon Seo-gu, Incheon Special Metropolitan City C, which is 605,73 square meters B, and the Defendant’s supplementary intervenor (hereinafter “the supplementary intervenor”) is a non-corporate association consisting of 85 land owners in the B park.

B. On May 29, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a real estate development investment and service contract for the joint development of the instant special case project with the Intervenor to the Intervenor, and entered into a new real estate development investment and service contract replacing the said contract with the Intervenor to the Defendant on July 31, 2013 after submitting a prior consultation on the instant special case project in the joint name with the Intervenor to the Defendant on July 31, 2013, after examining the complementary matters as required by the Defendant.

(hereinafter “instant development and service contract”). (c)

Plaintiff

On August 21, 2015, the Intervenor entered into a “MOU for Special Park Development Activities” in relation to the instant special case project with the Plaintiff and the Intervenor as a private park promoter. D.

On August 22, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Intervenor submitted the proposal for the instant special case project to the Defendant. Accordingly, on February 2, 2017, the Defendant accepted the proposal on the condition that “the project plan (park facilities and non-park facilities) may change the details of the plan according to administrative procedures, such as the feasibility review results of the project and the formulation of an urban/Gun management plan (such as a park building plan and a change in the area of use), and reflect it in the project plan.”

E. On December 19, 2016, the Plaintiff appointed the Intervenor as the representative of a joint proposer to the Defendant.