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

A. The Plaintiff is an owner who owns 4/10 of a 4,523 square meters in a fish farm in Jeju-si, and a 6,790 square meters in a G fish farm, and is engaged in the corrosion and culture of a fish culture in a fish farm in the fish farm.

B. B around December 2015, the Defendant filed an application with the Defendant for a construction permit that newly constructs one unit of detached house (hereinafter “instant house”) with the building area and total floor area of 82.65 square meters, building-to-land ratio and floor area ratio of 16.8673% each on the ground of Jeju-si, Jeju-si (hereinafter “instant site”). On December 17, 2015, the Defendant permitted the construction of the instant building on December 17, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

The instant site belongs to a planned management area under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”).

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 4, Eul's 1 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the defendant's defense prior to the merits

A. As to the defendant's assertion that the plaintiff seeks revocation of the disposition of this case on the grounds of infringement of living benefits, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff's standing to sue is unlawful since there is no direct and specific legal interest to seek revocation of the disposition of this case as a third party who is not the direct counter party to the disposition of this case

나. 판단 ㈎ 행정처분의 직접 상대방이 아닌 자로서 그 처분에 의하여 자신의 환경상 이익이 침해받거나 침해받을 우려가 있다는 이유로 취소소송을 제기하는 제3자는, 자신의 환경상 이익이 그 처분의 근거 법규 또는 관련 법규에 의하여 개별적ㆍ직접적ㆍ구체적으로 보호되는 이익, 즉 법률상 보호되는 이익임을 입증하여야 원고적격이 인정된다.

However, there is an environmental infringement due to the business, such as the act done by the administrative disposition in the relevant laws and regulations or related laws.