1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 688,450,040 against the Plaintiff on March 6, 2013 is revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the implementer of a housing reconstruction project that constructs multi-family housing on the ground of 90-22,000m2, Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government opening-dong (hereinafter “instant project”).

The Plaintiff obtained authorization from the Defendant on May 1, 2008 for the establishment of an association, and obtained authorization for the implementation of a project on November 14, 2008, changing the number of households of an apartment to be newly built on April 1, 2010 to 978 households.

After obtaining approval for the management and disposal plan from the Defendant on October 21, 2010 and approval for the change of the management and disposal plan on July 21, 201, the Plaintiff started construction on November 10, 201.

B. The number of existing households in the project area of this case is 946 households, and the number of households in apartments to be built by the implementation of the project of this case is 978 households with increased 32 households.

However, part of the owners of the land and buildings within the instant project zone did not consent to the establishment of the association, or the Plaintiff sold the land, etc. to the association, or received cash settlement without applying for parcelling-out, and the Plaintiff sold 205 households out of the above apartment.

C. On March 6, 2013, the Defendant imposed a charge of KRW 688,450,040 on the Plaintiff pursuant to Articles 5(1) and 5-2 of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Securing, etc. of School Sites (amended by Act No. 13006, Jan. 20, 2015; hereinafter “former School Sites Act”) on the basis of 205 households sold by the Plaintiff to the general public (i.e., the total amount of KRW 86,056,256,072 x imposition rate of KRW 0.8%, and KRW 200 (hereinafter “former School Sites Act”).

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] A] without dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 6 (including the relevant number), Eul evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

(a) as shown in the Attachment of the relevant statutes;

B. On July 25, 2013, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Korea held that a city under the proviso of Article 5(1)5 of the former School Sites Act is a city and a city under Article 5(1)5 of the same Act.