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 “D Park” located in the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Group was designated as the neighboring green park under the Urban Management Plan around December 1962.

B. The Plaintiff Company B is the owner of Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E forest land E, 73,481 square meters (hereinafter “the instant forest”) located within the land designated as “D Park,” and the Plaintiff Company A (hereinafter “Plaintiff Company”) is the operator of the private park project for the instant forest land.

C. Pursuant to Article 21-2 of the Act on Urban Parks, Greenbelts, Etc., the Plaintiffs requested the Defendant to provide prior consultation on the project for special park (hereinafter “instant project”) that builds rental housing, which is a facility other than a park and park facility (hereinafter “non-park facility”) in the instant forest. On July 21, 2016, the Defendant demanded the Plaintiff Company to submit the review data on the project plan for non-park facility facilities, such as standing timber and tap-water survey data, and gradient survey data (hereinafter “instant data”), which are necessary to determine whether the Plaintiff Company satisfies the criteria for permission for development activities in relation to the construction of non-park facilities, and guidelines for the special park facility development activities under subparagraph 4 of [Attachment Table 1] of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Guidelines on Special Cases concerning Urban Parks.

Plaintiff

Around August 2016, the company submitted the review data on the project plan for non-park facilities in accordance with the guidelines for special cases concerning development activities in urban parks in Seoul Special Metropolitan City to the Defendant and expressed that the Defendant did not have any obligation to submit the instant data to the Plaintiffs pursuant to Article 56 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”). However, the Defendant again demanded the said Plaintiff to submit the instant data by September 30, 2016.

E. On November 9, 2016, the Plaintiffs reaffirmed that they did not submit the instant data. However, the Defendant, on November 14, 2016, submitted the instant data to the Plaintiffs by December 15, 2016.