1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On October 27, 2006, the head of Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City announced the public inspection according to the proposal for the designation of a planned area for housing site development with respect to the area of 11,188,450 square meters in Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon. On February 6, 2009, the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs announced D's designation of a planned area for housing site development and approval of a development plan for a planned area for housing site development in the zone of D'

B. On November 10, 2006, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the Plaintiff on November 8, 2006 with respect to the building, such as the 619 square meters of the Seo-gu Incheon F warehouse site and its ground housing, etc. (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”), which was registered under the name of husband E, in the Plaintiff’s husband E.

C. The Defendant, as the operator of the instant project, established the relocation measures for the instant project pursuant to Article 78 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects and Article 40 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and publicly announced the period of application for the relocation measures from January 2, 2017 to April 28, 2017. Of the relocation measures, the Defendant determined the requirements for a person subject to the relocation measures, among the relocation measures, the requirements for a person subject to the relocation measures, “the person who has continuously owned and continuously resided in a house within the project district from January 2, 2017 to April 28, 2017” as “the date of the public announcement of the designation of the housing site subject to the housing site development plan (O. 27,

On January 19, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the selection of a person eligible for supply of a resettled housing site. On July 28, 2017, the Defendant excluded the Plaintiff from the relocation measures that the Plaintiff owned a house within the instant project district after the date of relocation measures (from October 27, 2006, the date of public inspection and public announcement of designation of a prearranged housing site development district, to be excluded from the subject of supply of the resettled housing site because the Plaintiff failed to meet the requirements.