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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

The court's explanation on this part is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (section 2, 7, and 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance). Thus, the court's explanation on this part is acceptable in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Judgment

Plaintiff’s assertion

From March 2001, the Plaintiff leased Seo-gu Incheon District for Housing Site Development, which is the land located within the housing site development area of the instant project, and run the business by installing the obstacles of this case. On July 6, 2009, there were obstacles to the instant land, the Defendant excluded the Plaintiff’s obstacles from the subject of compensation.

On May 30, 2013, the Plaintiff sent a content-certified document to the Defendant and demanded the progress of the procedure necessary for compensation, but the Defendant did not take any measure against this.

Therefore, it is unlawful that the defendant does not disclose administrative information as to the matters stated in the separate sheet, and the defendant should pay the plaintiff the same compensation given to other compensation recipients, such as compensation for the obstacles in this case, as well as compensation for relocation measures, etc.

A lawsuit seeking confirmation of illegality of an omission against an administrative information non-disclosure can be brought only by a person who has filed an application for a disposition and has legal interest in seeking confirmation of illegality of an omission. Accordingly, a response by an administrative agency seeking such action must be related to a disposition stipulated in Article 2(1)1 of the Administrative Litigation Act. Thus, even if a party did not file an application for an administrative act against an administrative agency or filed an application, the party does not have any legal or logical right to demand the administrative agency to conduct such administrative act, or the administrative agency rendered a rejection disposition against a party’s application, the party has no standing to sue or is subject to appeal.