1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On July 12, 2012, the head of Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan Government made a public announcement of Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan Government on the 11,885,000 square meters of Gangseo-gu, Busan Metropolitan Government Cdong, Ddong, Edong, for the designation of the Busan Fwater basin.

On December 14, 2012, the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs designated the project zone as G G, the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs announced on December 14, 2012, and established and announced the Busan Metropolitan City, the defendant, and the Busan Urban Corporation.

(hereinafter “instant project.” On January 21, 2016, the Defendant directed the receipt of an application for the selection of a person eligible for relocation to Ddong during the instant project zone, and the said notice sets out the date on which the criteria for selection of persons eligible for relocation and livelihood measures are to be determined as July 12, 2012 (the date of public announcement of district designation) and the person eligible for relocation housing supply was “the person who continues to own a residential building within the project zone from July 12, 2012 to the date of public announcement of the hearing of residents’ opinions on designation of the waterfront designated (the date of public announcement of district designation) or the date of adjudication of expropriation of the said building.

The Plaintiff, on March 22, 2016, filed an application for the selection of a person subject to relocation measures with the Defendant on March 22, 2016, as the Plaintiff’s ownership was incorporated into the instant project area with the Busan Gangseo-gu H site and the roof of the slate of wood tanks on its ground, 69.75 square meters, and Pyeongtaek 11.9 square meters attached thereto (hereinafter “instant housing”).

On May 16, 2016 and September 22, 2016, the Defendant determined that the person who actually resided in the instant housing after 2008 was not the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff, and notified the Plaintiff on December 1, 2016 that he was excluded from the person subject to relocation measures on the ground of “unresident status” on the ground of “unresident status” in the instant housing.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an objection on January 2, 2017, and the Defendant filed on February 2, 2017.