1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit is Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

1. Basic facts and circumstances of dispositions;

A. The Intervenor is a housing redevelopment project partnership established to implement the housing redevelopment project in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C (hereinafter “instant project zone”), and the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Appointed D (hereinafter “Plaintiff, etc.”) owned the land, etc. located within the instant project zone when referring together to the Plaintiff and the Appointed D (hereinafter “Plaintiff, etc.”)

B. On November 29, 2006, the Committee for Promotion of the Establishment of the B-Housing Redevelopment Project Association, a telegraph of the Intervenor, collected written consent for the establishment of the association from the owner of the land, etc. located within the instant project zone, and was subject to the Defendant’s disposition for authorization for establishment of the association (hereinafter “instant authorization disposition”).

C. On May 23, 2007, the Intervenor formulated a project implementation plan under the premise that the instant authorization disposition is valid, and held a general meeting to decide on the case of approval for project implementation (change) (hereinafter “instant resolution”). Accordingly, on September 3, 2007, the Intervenor received a disposition for authorization for project implementation (hereinafter “instant disposition”). After formulating a management and disposition plan, the Intervenor was issued a disposition for authorization for project implementation on June 5, 2008, and issued a disposition for authorization for project implementation on April 1, 2010.

Plaintiff

On October 30, 2009, the Intervenor filed a lawsuit against the Defendant disputing the validity of the instant authorization for establishment. On May 31, 2010, the Intervenor re-written consent for the establishment of the association from the owner of the land, etc. located within the instant project zone, and obtained the authorization for the establishment of the association from the Defendant on May 31, 2010 (hereinafter “instant authorization for establishment”).

E. Meanwhile, on the other hand, on July 22, 2010, the Seoul Administrative Court rendered a judgment dismissing the lawsuit as Seoul Administrative Court 2009Guhap46146 on July 22, 2010.

Accordingly, on June 30, 201, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Seoul High Court Decision 2010Nu27761.