1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

On February 9, 2011, the Promotion Committee for Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project (hereinafter “instant Improvement Project”) established an association (hereinafter “instant Promotion Committee”) with approval from the Defendant, and on February 25, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for specialized management of the rearrangement project (a certificate No. 3; hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Plaintiff, with the Promotion Committee’s contract for specialized management services for the rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant services”).

On July 30, 2015, the Defendant revoked the approval for establishment of the instant promotion committee. On January 20, 2016, the said promotion committee filed an application with the Defendant for payment of subsidies of KRW 2,596,03,131 in total, pursuant to Article 16-2(4) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) and Articles 11-3 and 11-4 of the Gyeonggi-do Ordinance on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Ordinance”).

On April 4, 2016, the Defendant, after deliberation by the Committee for Calculation of Expenses Incurred in Using Pyeongtaek-si (hereinafter “instant Calculation Committee”), issued the instant Promotion Committee a “Notice of Decision on Subsidies” stating that “The Plaintiff’s performance of duties concerning the instant service is 10%, and thus, it shall be determined as KRW 336,923,00,00,” which reads that “the Plaintiff’s performance of duties concerning the instant service is 10%.

(B) Nos. 1 and 2). On May 3, 2016, the instant promotion committee filed an objection against the Defendant’s notification of the amount of the above subsidy on the grounds that “the instant service’s performance of duties constitutes 20%, and thus the service cost subsidy should be increased to 700,240,000 won” with the Defendant.

(B) On July 12, 2016, the Defendant deliberated on the instant calculation committee’s re-verification of the foregoing objection (Evidence No. 4), and on July 21, 2016, “The instant promotion committee” as KRW 336,923,00,00 (10%) the previous subsidy for service costs.