1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant was established for the purpose of implementing a housing redevelopment improvement project with the size of 185,269.3 square meters in Ansan-si as an improvement zone (hereinafter “instant improvement zone”) during the implementation of the housing redevelopment improvement project, and was authorized by the Ansan-si market on May 29, 2012.

B. Plaintiff B is the owner of 45/100 shares of the former G H-dong building ( neighboring living facilities), G, I ground J-dong building ( neighboring living facilities) and each of the above lands during Gyeyang-si in the instant improvement zone. Plaintiff C is the owner of 45/100 shares of each of the above lands. Plaintiff D is the owner of 10/100 shares of each of the above lands, and Plaintiff A is the owner of 10/100 shares of each of the above lands, and Plaintiff A Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Plaintiff A”) is the company that leases the above building and operates the factory.

C. The Defendant: (a) prepared a project implementation plan to build 34 Dong 3850 households in the instant improvement zone; and (b) obtained approval of the project implementation plan from the Ansan market on June 2, 2015; and (c) obtained approval of the management and disposal plan from the Ansan market on April 22, 2016.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant project implementation plan and management and disposal plan”) D.

On July 27, 2017, the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Tribunal decided to expropriate each of the above lands and buildings by determining the commencement date of expropriation as of July 27, 2017, and the defendant deposited the compensation for each of the above ownership to the plaintiff B, C, and D in accordance with the expropriation ruling on July 19, 2017, and deposited the business compensation to the plaintiff A.

E. The Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the Defendant and the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Tribunal seeking the revocation, etc. of the said adjudication on expropriation as the Suwon District Court 2017Guhap6705.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion of judgment as to the defense prior to the merits is the same as the third-party A, which is followed. Accordingly, the defendant, as to this, is the plaintiffs.