1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance for the acceptance of the judgment is as follows. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except for the addition of the judgment as to the argument that the plaintiff made to the appellate court, and therefore, it is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it shall be cited by Article 8(2)

Part written after the completion shall be from 11th to 18th of the second page (1. the reasons for the disposition are as follows: (a) the reasons for the disposition; (b) the part in paragraphs (a) and (b)).

A person shall be appointed.

A. The Governor of the Gyeonggi-do established a development plan on July 31, 2009 under the provisions of Article 4 of the Urban Development Act as the announcement of Gyeonggi-do on July 31, 2009 for the E-Urban Development Zone Act, which was designated and announced as H in Gyeonggi-do’s notification, and made a correction to J. 1 August 2009.

On December 31, 2009, the head of Pyeongtaek-si established and announced the development plan for the "E" as the notification D of Pyeongtaek-si on December 31, 2009.

B. On April 1, 2010, the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do approved and publicly notified the implementation plan of the Urban Development Project Act as F in accordance with Article 17 of the Urban Development Act, and the head of Pyeongtaek-si approved and publicly notified the modification of the implementation plan of the said Act as G public notice of Pyeongtaek-si on September 7, 2012.

Part 2 of the 4th "Additional Law" is added with the following contents: 【The designation of the land scheduled for substitution or the disposition of replotting must be conducted in accordance with the land substitution plan, and the designation of the land scheduled for substitution or the disposition of replotting against the contents of the land substitution plan shall not be deemed to be invalid, and the designation of the land scheduled for substitution or that of the disposition of replotting against the contents of

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. (i) As to the conjunctive claim against the Defendant Union, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was located on the front side of the road, since Pyeongtaek-si C& 792 square meters owned by the Plaintiff, which was operating another fish exchange store, was located on the front of the road.