Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal are the judgment of the first instance.

A. The Plaintiff owned the instant existing building B (hereinafter “the instant existing building”) in Daegu-gun, but was expropriated or removed as the instant existing building was a public project, which was executed by the number of parties to the instant building, and received compensation therefor on October 22, 2018.

B. On December 13, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for a building permit with the Defendant to construct a new residential facility with a building area of 58.56 square meters, total floor area of 149 square meters, a third-class neighborhood living facility with a third-class neighborhood living facility located in the Seo-gu, Daegu-gu (hereinafter “the instant application site”).

(c)

On the other hand, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a reply stating that “The construction of neighborhood living facilities in the instant application site would become impossible,” and on December 24, 2018, the Plaintiff withdrawn the said application on the following grounds: (a) from the time of designation of the development restriction zone pursuant to Article 12 of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones (hereinafter “Development Restriction Zone Act”) and attached Table 1/ [Attachment 1] of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act; (b) since the land category was the site and the land with existing houses, from the time of designation of the development restriction zone.”

(d)

On December 27, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a building permit equivalent to the foregoing paragraph (b) (hereinafter “instant application”). On January 7, 2019, the Defendant issued a supplementary notice to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff is entitled to construct a building on his/her own land within the development restriction zone if the existing building (house, neighboring residential facilities) is demolished due to the implementation of this public works pursuant to subparagraph 5(c) and (d) of attached Table 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Development Restriction Zone Act (hereinafter “Attachment 1”). In such cases, it is deemed possible to grant a building permit in the area where the existing building is located and the area consulted with the neighboring Si/Gun/Gu pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Development Restriction Zone Act, but no consultation has been made with the owner and the relevant agency up to now.

(f).