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

A. On November 24, 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) was a corporation established for the purpose of crushinging aggregate, selling aggregate, etc.; and (b) filed an application for permission to engage in development activities for the purpose of building aggregate lines, crushing, and camping (hereinafter “instant application”) with the Defendant to build aggregate on the ground of 707-1,298 square meters in Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do; and (c) 1,717 square meters (hereinafter “instant application site”) prior to 708 square meters in each of the said land (hereinafter “instant application”).

Permission shall be restricted for reasons such as concerns over damage to the surrounding natural scenery and aesthetic view if a structure installed by development activities pursuant to Article 58 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, Enforcement Decree of the same Act [Attachment Table 1-2], Article 3-2-4 of the Operation Guidelines for Permission for Development Activities (Relation to Adjacent Areas) and attached Table 4 (Non-Urban Area Scenic Criteria) of the same Guidelines is viewed on the Gun roads, and permission shall be limited for reasons such as concern of occurrence of damage caused by noise, vibration, dust, etc. in the relevant area and its surrounding area at the time of screening

B. On January 26, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting the instant application for the following reasons (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. For the following reasons, the instant disposition is revoked on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s assertion is based on abstract and ambiguous grounds without objective and specific grounds, and is in violation of the principle of proportionality. Therefore, it should be revoked on the grounds that there is an abuse of discretion.

① In the vicinity of the instant application, there is a factory, unmanned telecom, stable, etc., and a place where the instant application is being filed is not an area to protect the scenery, but an area to protect the scenery. After destroying the floor of the application site, the Plaintiff installed the instant facilities, installed soundproof walls, attached eco-friendly trees of colors and promotional materials of tamprae, etc. to the outer wall, and affixed the outer wall on the outer wall.