(a) If the agreement on the urban redevelopment project is amended, the consent of at least two-thirds of the landowners within the redevelopment area is required (affirmative);

(b) In a case where the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which owns land in the urban redevelopment district, authorized the modification of the regulations of the redevelopment project with the authority delegated by the Minister of Construction and Transportation, whether it can be deemed that he consented to the modification of the regulations (affirmative);

A. In light of the legislative intent stipulated in Article 14 of the Urban Redevelopment Act that the landowner’s consent is required at the time of applying for authorization of the regulations of the redevelopment project, it is necessary to apply Article 14 of the same Act to the time of amending the regulations of the urban redevelopment project that directly affects the rights and obligations of the landowners, etc., as at the time of applying the said regulations, and to the consent of more than two-thirds of the landowners within the redevelopment

B. If the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City delegated by the Minister of Construction and Transportation approves the modification of the Urban Redevelopment Project Code, the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City shall be deemed to be a government agency dealing with the affairs delegated by the head of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City as a representative of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which is a local government, with respect to the affairs of approving the modification of the Urban Redevelopment Project Code, but on the other hand, the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City has the status as the representative of the local government, and the landowner's consent required at the time of the modification of the Urban Redevelopment Project Code, etc. shall be satisfied if it appears objectively in any way, and it is not necessary to complete any specific form or procedure. Therefore, when the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City concurrently holds the above status of both parties, if the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor, which owns the land in the redevelopment Zone, has authorized the modification without express objection to the modification of the Code, it shall be deemed that the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor, which is the landowner, has expressed its intent

(b)Article 14 of the Urban Redevelopment Act; Article 8 of the Urban Redevelopment Act; Article 58 (1) 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the Urban Redevelopment Act;

Hyundai Construction Co., Ltd., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor

Defendant 1 and two others

Seoul High Court Decision 83Gu1103 delivered on December 12, 1984

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal (the grounds of appeal by the Defendant’s assistant intervenor are examined to the extent of supplement in case of the Defendant’s grounds of appeal).

(1) The purpose of Article 14 of the Urban Redevelopment Act is to coordinate and protect the rights and obligations of the interested parties by prescribing the contents of the above regulations which provide for the rights and obligations of the landowners, such as the burden of expenses for the implementation of the project, the management and disposal plan, and the matters concerning liquidation, etc. The provisions of Articles 12 and 14 of the Urban Redevelopment Act are to stipulate the rights and obligations of the interested parties by the intention of the majority of interested parties. However, when revising the regulations of the redevelopment project prepared and authorized (excluding modification of minor matters prescribed by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Construction and Transportation; hereinafter the same shall apply), it is not clear whether the said regulations require the consent of more than 2/3 of the landowners of the redevelopment area at the time of authorization of the above regulations, but in light of the legislative intent of the provision that requires the consent of the landowners, etc. at the time of approval of the regulations, it is not clear whether the consent of more than 2/3 of the land owners within the redevelopment area should be applied to the modification of the regulations at the time of Article 14 of the Urban Redevelopment Act.

(2) According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that with respect to the execution of redevelopment projects and amendments to the above rules applied by the defendant 1, who is the plaintiff 1, the defendant 1, the defendant 3, the defendant 3, and the defendant 3, among the land owners in the redevelopment district, they agreed to the alteration of the redevelopment district, and that the plaintiff and the defendant 3, who agreed to the alteration, did not express any intent to do so, shall be 370.7, and since the total area of the above redevelopment district is 567.1, it is obvious that the land area of the land within the above redevelopment district is less than 2/3 of the total area of the land owner, and only 3, the above alteration of the above rules and regulations and the above amendment is against the provisions on the requirements of the above consent. Accordingly, the defendant's assertion that the above alteration of the regulations and the above amendment is unlawful, and that the defendant's disposition of this case's land owner and the defendant's land owner's land owner's consent to the above alteration of this case shall not be justified.

However, the authority to authorize the execution and alteration of the redevelopment project of this case under the Urban Redevelopment Act is the state administrative affairs under the control of the Minister of Construction and Transportation, and it is delegated to the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City, who is the head of a local government under the provisions of Article 8 (1) 5 of the Urban Redevelopment Act and Article 58 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. In this case, the head of Seoul Special Metropolitan City shall be deemed to be a government agency in handling the above affairs entrusted by the agency. However, on the other hand, the head of Seoul Special Metropolitan City has the status as the representative of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which is a local government, and on the other hand, the landowner's consent required at the time of the amendment of the Urban Redevelopment Act should be objectively shown in any way of the fact that there is an intention of such consent, and it is not necessary to provide a specific form or procedure. In light of the above, when the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City, who holds the land in the redevelopment district of this case, there is no objection to the amendment of the regulations, and there is reasonable ground to agree the above amendment of the agreement.

(3) Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kang Jin-young (Presiding Justice)