2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

A. The Plaintiffs filed an application for each building permit with the following content to the Defendant:

Plaintiff A on May 14, 2015, the use and size of the building located in the site (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant lands”) on the date of receipt of an application filed by the owner of the building, and on May 15, 2015, Plaintiff D 2,740.1 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant one land”) 1 Dong-si, 1,302 square meters, Plaintiff B, Dongsan-si, B, Dongsan-si, and Plaintiff B, 4,939 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant two land”) 3 Dong-si, 2,754 square meters, Dong-si, 3, 2,754 square meters, and 3,461 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant three land”) related to Dong-si, Seosan-si (hereinafter referred to as “the instant three land”) on May 15, 2015, and 11 Dong-dong, 1,575 square meters.

B. However, on May 27, 2015, the Defendant stated the Plaintiffs on the following grounds.

Each of the applications described in paragraph (1) was rejected (hereinafter collectively referred to as "the instant disposition").

The grounds for non-permission (hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition grounds”) - Even though the area where livestock raising is not limited, most farmers are likely to suffer damage to the quality of agricultural products due to malodor, dust, pots, and increase in the quality of agricultural products due to construction of livestock pens, as a clean clean area in which rice farmers grow rice, farm, vegetical, and flooding, etc. by eco-friendly farming methods, and also, damage to clean farmland in the relevant area and environment-friendly agricultural infrastructure are likely to collapse as it is collectively constructed in the excellent farmland among the excellent farmland in the arable area.

I have the honor to this effect.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 1 and 2, each of the statements, 2 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The main point of the plaintiffs' assertion is to revoke the disposition of this case in the following point of view.

1. Summary of building permission prescribed by the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Building Act.

The disposition of this case is a binding act that must be permitted if the case is kept, and the disposition of this case is required to be permitted.

Although all cases have been maintained, the defendant's reasons other than the laws and regulations are not relevant.