1. The plaintiff's respective claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

The plaintiff asserts as the cause of the claim of this case as shown in the annexed sheet.

However, even if the Defendants assumed that construction permission was delayed because they did not consent to the Plaintiff’s application for construction permission on April 2014, 2014, it is difficult to view that there was an inevitable reason for the Plaintiff to obtain a repayment loan from the Ansan Saemaul Depository at the time of December 11, 2014 ( further, as the Plaintiff’s assertion and evidence No. 5-7 can be known, it is difficult to deem that the Defendants were able to obtain the Plaintiff’s consent to the use of land at around March 2015 upon request of the collateral trust company for consent to the original contents of the construction, and the construction permission was obtained based only on “the Plaintiff did not consent to the Plaintiff’s application for construction permission,” and that it was difficult to view that the Defendants were able to obtain the Plaintiff’s consent to the use of land at the time of the request by the collateral trust company without consent to the Plaintiff’s construction permit. In light of the success in the construction permission, it is difficult to deem that the Defendants were able to obtain the Plaintiff’s consent to the construction permit.