All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 11, 2008, the Defendant is an urban environment rearrangement project association that has obtained authorization for the establishment of a project under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents by making 15,972 square meters of Seoul Dong-gu D Day as a project implementation district, and obtained authorization for the establishment of a project on November 15, 201.

B. The Defendant’s distribution of the written guidance for resettlement and the completion of the Plaintiffs’ resettlement 1) In order to encourage the early resettlement of its members, the Defendant explained that the period of application for the written guidance for resettlement to its members from June 1, 2015 to June 14, 2015, and that the period of period of resettlement determined from June 22, 2015 to September 13, 2015 and the submission of the written guidance for resettlement and the system for the lending of resettlement are implemented (hereinafter “the written guidance for resettlement of this case”).

A) Distribution was made. In the instant relocation guide, the specific explanation on the system of receiving the loan from E, a bank selected by the Defendant, stated that “A union member who does not receive the loan from the union, stated that “I will pay interest on the loan from the basic interest rate after calculating and paying the date from the date of the actual director.” Meanwhile, the Plaintiffs did not obtain the loan from E, and completed the relocation around June 22, 2015.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiffs’ assertion was that the Defendant expressed his/her intent to pay interest on the basic interest loan to the union members who did not borrow the loan through the instant relocation guide. On this issue, the Plaintiffs implicitly expressed their intent to accept the said offer by the completion of relocation without filing an application for the loan for relocation loan.

Therefore, it is true.