1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On May 18, 2006, the defendant is a housing redevelopment project partnership which has obtained approval for the establishment of a housing redevelopment project association from the head of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter "head of Seongdong-gu") on May 18, 2006 for the purpose of implementing a housing redevelopment project with the area of 68,812 square meters in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (hereinafter "instant project zone"), and the plaintiffs are the members of the defendant who own each land and buildings within the instant project

B. 1) The Defendant obtained project implementation authorization from the head of Seongdong-gu on June 29, 2006, and received the application period for parcelling-out from July 24, 2006 to September 1, 2006 for parcelling-out from July 24, 2006 to the period of September 1, 2006, and again made a re-public announcement of the application period for parcelling-out to the members of the association from May 12, 2007 to June 14, 2007. 2) The Defendant formulated a management and disposal plan based on the above details of the application for parcelling-out, and applied for a management and disposal plan on November 29, 2007 through the general meeting of the management and disposal, and applied for a re-public announcement of the management and disposal plan on January 28, 2008.

3) On December 31, 2009, after obtaining authorization for the change of the project implementation from the head of Seongdong-gu, the Defendant changed the details of the project implementation plan, such as the scale of commercial buildings and the number of household units of multi-family housing, and the sale period was extended from September 15, 2009 to September 30, 2009 (after this, from October 12, 2009).

(4) On May 4, 2010, when several lawsuits have been filed to make it difficult to proceed with the instant project, such as asserting the invalidity of the consent to establish an association and disputing the validity of the disposition to establish an association, the Defendant is new.