1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same reasoning as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal or addition of the following contents among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is recognized in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420

Each "paragraph 3 (1) 1 of paragraph (3)" shall be changed to "Article 3 (1) 1 of the proviso of paragraph (3)".

The "Special Act on the Promotion of Urban Renewal" (hereinafter referred to as the "Special Act on the Promotion of Urban Renewal") shall be construed as the "Gu Special Act on the Promotion of Urban Renewal (amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter referred to as the "Gu Special Act on the Promotion of Urban Renewal")."

The "Urban Renewal Act" in 6th 16th 16th 7th 2th 7th 7th 15th 15th 2th 2th 2th 3th 200.

The 8th 7th 2th 7th 2th 7th 3th 7th 7th 7th 7th 7th 7th 7th 20

9. The term "this Court" in the 14th place shall be changed to "court of the first instance."

13. Subsequent to the two parallels, “(The plaintiff asserts that the consent rate of the establishment of the association at the time of the conclusion of the party arguments reaches 69.2%, but it is not sufficient to recognize only the statement of evidence No. 20, but also the consent rate shall not exceed 75% of the number of the owners of the land, etc. who are the requirements for authorization of the establishment of the association)”.

14.The following shall be added to two pages:

【E) The Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for operating expenses twice on or around April 2015 and around September 2015 of the same year, but the Defendant asserts that all of the above applications were rejected and indirectly interfered with the Plaintiff’s business promotion.

However, it is not sufficient to recognize the evidence of Nos. 18 and 19 only with each statement, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

F. The plaintiff can implement a housing redevelopment project for the remaining areas except for the areas where there are many residents opposing the extension of the sunset period in the instant zone.