1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant is an association established on July 22, 2008 to implement a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant project”) that constructs multi-family housing with 767 households (rental housing 160 households) and ancillary and welfare facilities, etc. on a scale of 51,748 square meters in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “Mapo-gu”) and received project implementation authorization from the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “head of Mapo-gu”) on November 25, 2009.

B. On April 13, 2018, the Plaintiff submitted to the Defendant an application for supply of rental housing pursuant to Article 13(4) of the former Enforcement Rule of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance on the Improvement of Urban and Residential Environments (wholly amended by Seoul Special Metropolitan City Rules No. 4238, Aug. 2, 2018). The Defendant requested the head of Mapo-gu pursuant to Article 13(5) of the same Enforcement Rule to electronically search whether the Plaintiff and all members of the household own housing.

(c)The head of Mapo-gu confirmed that the Plaintiff acquired a house located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D as a result of computer search through the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport and notified the Defendant

The defendant demanded that the plaintiff submit explanatory materials related to the ownership of the above house on August 6, 2018 according to the above notice, and the same year.

8. 30. Reviewing the Plaintiff’s submission of explanatory materials, the Plaintiff finally notified that the Plaintiff was excluded from a lessee of rental housing.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, entry of Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. The defendant's defense prior to the merits is the implementer of the project in this case, who is a tenant of the project in this case, and only pays housing relocation expenses or performs affairs such as guidance for application for parcelling-out of rental housing and rearrangement of data, and is not an institution directly providing rental housing or examining eligibility for occupancy. Thus, the plaintiff

B. We examine below.