1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant Association is a party. 1) The Defendant Association is a F apartment with the size of 24,161.6m2, G and four lots outside Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

(1) A housing reconstruction project for the housing reconstruction project (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”);

The reconstruction association which obtained authorization from the head of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on November 18, 2002 to implement the project is a reconstruction association. The defendant association is the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”).

(2) Upon the enactment on December 30, 2002 and the enforcement on July 1, 2003, the registration of incorporation was completed on July 29, 2003. (2) Plaintiff A is a member of the Defendant Union, who owns the instant apartment Nos. 35-602, and Plaintiff B, respectively.

3) Plaintiff C was a member of the Defendant Union, who owned the instant apartment No. 35 Dong 407, and on September 22, 2014, the said apartment is a person who lost its ownership due to the successful bid in the real estate auction procedure (Seoul Central District Court H). Plaintiff D was a member of the Defendant Union, who owned the instant apartment No. 35 Dong 1207, on February 15, 2016, and was disqualified from its ownership due to the successful bid in the real estate auction procedure (Seoul Central District Court I).

5) On July 8, 2014, Plaintiff E was a member of the Defendant Union, who owned the instant apartment Nos. 34 1203, 1203, and was disqualified from the ownership due to the said apartment auction procedure (Seoul Central District CourtJ, J.K.). (B) After the implementation of the instant improvement project, the Defendant Union was authorized to implement the project on July 11, 2006 by the head of Gangnam-gu.

2) On July 13, 2006, the Defendant Union issued an instruction of the application for parcelling-out and a public notice of the procedure for parcelling-out to the members of the association, and received an application for parcelling-out from the members of the association between July 13, 2006 and August 11, 2006. 3) The Plaintiffs were to be newly constructed by the Defendant Association within the period for application for parcelling-out in this case (hereinafter “new apartment”).