The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

1. The grounds for the disposition and the relevant statutes are stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. Whether the disposition in this case is legitimate or not, the plaintiff argues that the site for rental housing should be supplied at a price below the development cost in light of the nature of the site created through the development project in this case. Thus, the development charges system prescribed by the Restitution of Development Gains Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") shall be applied to the public health zone and the development charges system under the Restitution of Development Gains Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), since the project operator implemented the development project with the approval of the State or the local government, etc. in order to increase the land price of the land for the development project, and there is an unincome from the development project exceeding the normal land price increase, the project operator is not exclusive to the project operator, but to recover the part of the land and distribute it to the local government to which the land belongs, thereby realizing economic justice, preventing speculation, and promoting the efficient use of the land. The development project, which is the project subject to the development charges, includes the housing site development projects, housing site development projects and apartment site development projects under the Housing Site Development Promotion Act, but it does not appear to be excluded from the development charges imposed by the plaintiff.