beta
Text
1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
purport, purport, ..
Reasons
1.The following facts are apparent to be recorded:
On May 24, 2012, the plaintiffs applied for approval of their business plans on January 25, 200 in violation of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, etc.
4. A disposition of return. On September 16, 2009, the disposition of revocation was issued against the approval of the project and the approval of the modification thereof, and due to the occupational misconduct in the Namyang-ju market, the damage equivalent to KRW 95 billion was incurred.
Then, the Seoul Central District Court 2012Gahap43640 filed a lawsuit claiming payment of KRW 110 million as part of the claim for damages and damages for delay against the defendant.
B. On April 23, 2014, the above court rendered a judgment dismissing all the plaintiffs' claims.
The Plaintiffs appealed from this Court No. 2014Na201669, and appointed a law firm as an attorney.
C. On June 25, 2015, this Court rendered a judgment to dismiss all appeals filed by the plaintiffs on June 25, 2015, “the judgment subject to a retrial.”
(4) On July 3, 2015, the Plaintiffs appealed to the instant judgment subject to a retrial, and filed a final appeal with the Supreme Court Decision 2015Da225769, Jul. 3, 2015, and appointed a law firm as the legal representative. The Plaintiffs’ legal representative in the instant judgment subject to a retrial was erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles as set forth below, the violation of the rules of evidence, and the failure to examine, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. (1) The lower court, which entered into force on November 30, 2003, was the former Housing Act (amended by Act No. 7030, Dec. 31, 2003); and (2) thereafter, was the same.
The lower court erred by applying Article 6, rather than Article 5 of the Addenda. (2) In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the scope of application of the Housing Construction Promotion Act, etc., and thereby, has the authority to make a return disposition or disposition of cancellation in this case to the