1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. B around June 195, the Defendant filed an application with the Defendant for designation of a project implementer and authorization for installation and management of park facilities of the Sungnam Urban Planning Facility Project (C) (hereinafter “instant project”).

As the defendant rejected the application of B, B filed an administrative appeal seeking the revocation and implementation of the return disposition to the Gyeonggi-do Governor.

B. On March 13, 1996 and December 31, 1996, the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do revoked the Defendant’s return disposition, and ordered the implementation of the project of this case to designate the project implementer and to authorize the implementation plan.

The Defendant did not fulfill his/her obligations under the above implementing ruling, B applied for the implementation of the cited ruling on March 5, 1997, and on April 16, 1998, the Gyeonggi-do Governor issued a disposition to designate the concessionaire and to authorize the implementation plan for the instant project with respect to B directly as shown in the Gyeonggi-do Public Notice D (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. According to the instant disposition, the subject site of the instant project is five parcels, including Sungnam-si E Forest, and the scheduled date for commencement of the project is three months from the date of authorization, and the scheduled date for completion of the project was “36 months from the date of arrival”.

In addition, the Gyeonggi-do Governor added a total of 26 clauses to the disposition of this case as the title of the "Disposition Conditions and the Order of Implementation of Administrative Procedures".

Defendant Na against the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do.

The direct disposition (disposition in this case) filed a petition with the Constitutional Court for adjudication on competence dispute with the assertion that the defendant infringed on the defendant's authority.

On July 22, 1999, the Constitutional Court confirmed on July 22, 199 that the disposition of the instant F urban planning road in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si (hereinafter “instant urban planning road”) was null and void as it infringed on the defendant’s authority.

According to the above decision of the Constitutional Court, among the dispositions of this case, the designation of the project implementer and the approval of the implementation plan of the urban planning road of this case were invalidated.

E. B shall be July 3, 2002