1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit include the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Intervenor joining the Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a housing redevelopment project partnership aimed at housing redevelopment project with the aim of housing redevelopment project as to the multi-party 61,761m square meters of land located in Daejeon-gu D (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”). The Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the Daejeon Metropolitan City Land Expropriation Committee, which is the ruling authority, seeking revocation of the above expropriation when the land was expropriated because owners of land in the instant rearrangement zone did not apply for parcelling-out but did not apply for parcelling-out, and the Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the land expropriation committee in Daejeon Metropolitan City, which is the ruling authority.

B. (1) On April 23, 2005, an intervenor union held an inaugural general meeting on the approval of the establishment of the association, approval of the project implementation plan and public notice thereof (1) resolved on the agenda of the promotion committee, such as the articles of association, a draft project plan, and a consent to the implementation of the project. E, the representative of the promotion committee, becomes the representative of the intervenor association, and filed an application for the authorization of the establishment of the C Housing Redevelopment Project Association with the Defendant in the name of the

(2) After examining the above application, the Defendant confirmed that the number of legitimate owners of lands, etc. in the instant area was 307 and 248 of them agreed (as a result, the consent rate was 80.78%), and approved the establishment of C&A partnership on July 31, 2006 (hereinafter “instant authorization for establishment”).

(3) On October 18, 2006, the Intervenor Union submitted to the Defendant a written project implementation plan with a consent of more than a majority of the owners of land, etc. pursuant to the provisions of the articles of association and applied for authorization for the implementation of the project. The Defendant approved and announced the project implementation plan on December 28, 2006.

C. (1) An intervenor union’s modification authorization (1) additional association members arise due to changes in ownership, etc., and the written consent on establishment of the association was additionally submitted from the owners of land, etc. in the instant area on April 2, 2007.