1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 28, 2005, the Defendant: (a) executed a housing site development project for a zone A (hereinafter “instant project”) with respect to the size of 1,233,000 square meters in Kimhae-si; and (b) obtained approval of an implementation plan for the instant project from Sejong-do on October 31, 2012, following the public announcement of the designation of the instant project district.

B. After June 17, 2014, the Defendant provided a guidance on the relocation measures to a person subject to the relocation measures regarding the instant project. According to the above guidance, the person subject to the relocation measures should be “the person who has owned a house within the instant project district from the base date ( September 28, 2005) to the date of concluding the compensation contract or the date of ruling on expropriation, and who has continued to reside in the said project district” and shall be “the person who has been subject to the relocation measures, who

C. On June 25, 2014, the Plaintiff owned a ground house (hereinafter “instant house”) located in the Kimhae-si in the instant project zone (the name of the present address is Kimhae-si G due to the change of the administrative district and the reorganization of road name addresses) (hereinafter “instant house”). However, on December 19, 2014, the Defendant issued a notice to the Plaintiff on December 19, 2014 that “The Plaintiff was excluded from the person subject to relocation measures pursuant to Article 40(3)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “the instant disposition”).

On February 9, 2015, the Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the said administrative appeal on June 23, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful