Where there is a defect in the consent of the owner such as land for the establishment of a housing redevelopment and improvement project association, the validity of the approval for establishment;

Article 16 (1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions

Plaintiff 1 and 54 others (Attorney Kim Tae-hee, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Head of the Seo-gu Busan Metropolitan Government (Law Firm International Law, Attorneys Kim Tae-woo et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 200Na11448 delivered on May 1, 200

Supreme Court Decision 2009Da30427 Decided October 15, 2009

Busan High Court Decision 2009Nu6193 decided July 2, 2010

All appeals are dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Since a housing redevelopment project partnership, which is a project implementer of a housing redevelopment project, is established by the authorization and registration of the establishment of the competent administrative agency, and the consent of owners, such as land for the establishment of the partnership, is a procedural requirement required to take an administrative disposition such as the authorization of the establishment of the partnership, even if there is a defect in the association establishment consent, if the defect is not serious and obvious, the authorization of the establishment disposition can not be deemed null and void (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da29380, Oct. 28,

According to the facts acknowledged by the court below, at the time of applying for authorization to establish a housing redevelopment project promotion committee for the area 2,002 housing redevelopment project, the part of the "design outline of a new building" and "the estimated cost of removal or new construction of a building" was supplemented and stated in the written consent for establishment submitted to the defendant when applying for authorization to establish a new building. Thus, even if this part was publically inserted at the time of obtaining consent from the owner of the land, etc. as alleged by the plaintiffs, such circumstance alone does not necessarily mean that the Defendant's approval to establish a new building is null and void as it is serious and obvious.

In the same purport, the lower court’s conclusion that the instant disposition of approving the establishment of the association did not contain any defects falling under the grounds for invalidation.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Nung-hwan (Presiding Justice)