1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association established to implement a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project by making the Seoul Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul Metropolitan Government 87,952 square meters of land as a project implementation district.

B. The co-owned housing located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D land located in the Defendant’s business area (hereinafter “instant housing”) was constructed with a building permit obtained from the head of Mapo-gu Office on January 22, 1981 and registered in the building ledger with the approval for use obtained from the head of Mapo-gu Office on February 22, 1981.

C. The third floor of the instant housing is constructed without permission (paragraphs 1 and 2). On April 5, 1989, the Plaintiff moved to the parcel number of the said unauthorized building on the third floor, and then resides in the said third floor No. 1 (hereinafter “the instant unauthorized building”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 14 (including each number for a tentative number), Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. On December 18, 2015, which was after the filing of the instant lawsuit, the Defendant asserts that the head of Mapo-gu Office approved the management and disposal plan designating the Plaintiff as a person subject to cash settlement, and publicly notified on December 24, 2015, so long as the management and disposal plan, which is an administrative disposition, is not null and void, the Plaintiff asserts that there is no benefit to seek confirmation of the status of the Plaintiff’

However, the management and disposal plan can be revised until the disposition for sale in lots is taken, and its plan has become final and conclusive, and it does not change the legal principles on the interests of the lawsuit (see Supreme Court Decision 97Nu14606, Feb. 5, 199). In a case where the Defendant, who is a redevelopment association, denies the Plaintiff’s membership, the Plaintiff has the interest in filing a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking confirmation of the status of the association member by removing any risks existing in his/her rights or legal status.

Therefore, the defendant's defense prior to the merits is.