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

A. On August 31, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for permission to engage in development activities to install solar power infrastructure (hereinafter “instant application”) with respect to the aggregate of 5,657 square meters and 5,818 square meters (hereinafter “instant application site”) among the forest land B in Seocheon-gun, Seocheon-gun, Seocheon-gun and 161 square meters prior to C (hereinafter “instant application”).

B. On November 6, 2019, the Defendant rendered a non-permission disposition on the ground that the instant application was rejected as a result of deliberation by the Gun Planning Committee under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). The results of the Gun Planning Committee in Ycheon-gun are as follows:

【Grounds for rejection of the Committee’s holding of the Gun Planning Committee:

(a) Disaster risk concerns, such as soil and sand outflow and drainage, due to the location of the business has a strong gradient and adjoining to the residential area;

(b) Damaging scenery;

(c) A civil petition against neighboring residents in danger of disaster, such as earth and sand outflow and drainage;

Finally. [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion ① cannot reject the application for permission of development solely on the ground that the opposite civil petition was filed by the residents in the neighboring area of the application site of this case. ② The defendant's disposition of this case based on erroneous facts as to the average gradient and food conservation level of the application site of this case was erroneous in misunderstanding of facts in its discretionary act. ③ The Ministry of Environment's guidelines for consultation on environmental assessment of the land-based solar power generation project, which the defendant asserted as the basis of discretionary act, are used for consultation, such as environmental impact assessment, and thus cannot be applied to the determination of illegality of the disposition of this case. ④ According to the results of the prior examination of factors influencing disasters, disaster risk can be reduced through appropriate preventive measures, and natural landscape might be compared with other areas in the jurisdiction of the