1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 15, 2012, the Gwangju Metropolitan City Mayor: (a) designated and publicly announced the Seo-gu X large-scale 426,380 square meters (hereinafter “instant improvement zone”) as a housing redevelopment improvement project zone in Gwangju-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju Metropolitan City; and (b) publicly announced the said zone.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant rearrangement zone designation disposition”). (b)

In order to promote a housing reconstruction improvement project (hereinafter referred to as “instant rearrangement project”) in the instant rearrangement zone, the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Cooperative”) obtained authorization to establish an association from the head of Gwangju Metropolitan City, Seo-gu pursuant to Article 16(1) of the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (Amended by Act No. 13508, Sep. 18, 2015) (hereinafter referred to as “instant authorization to establish an association”).

C. On June 29, 2019, the Defendant Union obtained the approval of the project implementation plan for the instant improvement project from the head of the Dong-gu Seoul Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant project implementation plan and the approval of the project implementation plan”) on December 31, 2019 after holding an extraordinary general meeting and adopting a resolution on the project implementation plan, etc., and such approval was publicly announced as Seo-gu, Gwangju Metropolitan City on the same day.

The Plaintiffs are the owners of each land located in each part of the ship (hereinafter referred to as “Z zone”) that connects each point of the attached drawings 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 located in the instant rearrangement zone.

E. Meanwhile, Plaintiff C et al. filed a lawsuit against the head of Seo-gu, Gwangju Metropolitan City, as the Gwangju District Court 2017Guhap12100, seeking confirmation of invalidity of the authorization of the establishment of the instant association, but the said court dismissed Plaintiff C et al.’s claim on October 4, 2018. While Plaintiff C et al. appealed and appealed, all of which were dismissed, the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 3, 2019.

(Reasons for Recognition) Facts without dispute, Gap's 1, 2, and 3, Eul's 7, 8, and 14 (including additional numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. The plaintiffs' assertion.