1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiffs are residents residing in Changwon-si.

B. On April 23, 2013, at the plenary session of the Changwon City Council held, “Partial Amendment Ordinance on the Place of Changwon” (hereinafter “Ordinance”) was introduced, and the Speaker of the Changwon City Council declared that the Ordinance was passed at around 21:03 on the same day.

C. On April 24, 2013, the chairperson of the Changwon-si Council transferred the Ordinance to the Defendant, which was adopted as above, and the Defendant promulgated on May 14, 2013 the Ordinance on the Location of Changwon-si (Ordinance No. 593, hereinafter “Ordinance of Changwon-si”) partially amended as follows.

Article 2 (Location of Office) of the Ordinance on the Place of Creative Viewing shall be 151, as the center of the window of the Chang-si.

This Ordinance shall enter into force on the date of its promulgation.

[Judgment of the court below] The ground for recognition is without merit, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the ground for appeal

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. The plaintiffs' assertion 1) At the time of the integration of the Changwon-si and the Masan-si into the Changwon-si and the Masan-si, but the viewing location was agreed to be two at the time of the Gu, not the original Changwon-si, but the previous Changwon-si, and was integrated on the premise of such agreement. The Ordinance of this case is contrary to the above agreement and thus constitutes a disposition infringing on the legal interests of the residents of the Changwon-si. 2) During the process of the resolution of the Ordinance of this case, ① during the resolution of the Ordinance of this case, without declaring the opening of the plenary session after the chairman declares the meeting, the resolution was made after making a statement about the intention, and ② the Speaker was a member who stated that there was an objection when the Speaker raised an objection to the Ordinance of this case, and thus, the Speaker declared the resolution of the Ordinance of this case without the voting procedure.