1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. Plaintiff A (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff A”) was selected as a project implementer as a result of a bid for the project for the renovation and repair of underground road facilities in Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as “instant facilities”) and entered into an agreement with the Defendant on July 15, 2009 with respect to the instant facilities under Article 19 of the former Ordinance on the Management of Underground Streets (amended by Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance No. 5152, Jul. 28, 201); and the H institution entrusted by the Defendant with the management of underground shopping malls (hereinafter referred to as “H institution”); and on July 15, 2009, the Plaintiff shall carry out the project for the renovation and repair of the instant facilities; and it shall be transferred to Seoul Special Metropolitan City for ten years (from July 15, 2009 to May 25, 2020, taking into account the construction period) with respect to the instant facilities under the Agreement with the content of operating the instant facilities (hereinafter referred to as “the instant agreement”); the first loan charges of this case and the public property amount of KRW 4.3130 billion.

B. Plaintiff B, C, D, E, and F (hereinafter “Plaintiff B, etc.”) are lessees who have concluded each lease contract with Plaintiff A with respect to individual stores of the instant facilities.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The instant provision’s assertion is null and void in violation of Article 22 of the Local Autonomy Act, which limits the rights of residents and imposes obligations on residents without statutory delegation.

3. Judgment on the defendant's main defense of safety

A. Defendant’s assertion 1) The instant provision is not subject to appeal litigation because it does not directly limit the rights and obligations of the Plaintiffs without any separate enforcement act. 2) The instant provision was replaced by Article 8(3)1 of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance on the Management of Underpasses, which was amended by Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance No. 7416 on December 31, 2019, and the validity of the agreement concluded by the Plaintiffs is invalid.