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

On January 8, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a report on the installation of livestock excreta discharge facilities [195 square meters (140 square meters of livestock breeding facilities, 33 square meters of compost, 22 square meters of compost storage facilities) on the ground in Busan-gun B (hereinafter “instant land”) with the Defendant on January 8, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a report on the installation of livestock excreta discharge facilities (195 square meters of livestock breeding facilities, 140 square meters of composts, 33 square meters of composts of composts, 22 square meters of composts: Guns

On January 11, 2018, the Defendant’s land in this case is the area subject to restriction on livestock raising under Article 3 of the Ordinance on the Designation of Areas subject to Restriction on Livestock Raising in Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “Ordinance on the Designation of Areas subject to Restriction on Livestock Raising”) for the specific use area. ② There exists a purchase of livestock excreta after the designation and public announcement of areas subject to restriction on livestock raising due to livestock excreta discharge facilities registered as livestock pens on the register of buildings; and the purchase of livestock excreta in this case after the designation and public announcement of areas subject to restriction on livestock raising after the designation and public announcement of areas subject to restriction on livestock raising is lawful after the designation and public announcement of existing areas subject to restriction on livestock raising. Considering the purport of the legitimacy of systematic and legal management of the existing unreported livestock pens without permission, the Defendant’s purchase of livestock excreta discharge facilities cannot be deemed to be “existing before the designation and public announcement of areas subject to restriction on livestock raising at the time this Act enters into force” under Article 8(2) of the Addenda of the Building Act, and it does not constitute illegal waste discharge facilities under Article 8 of the Building Act.

hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"

In the case of this case, 300 to 500 meters of the facility of this case, 300 to 300 to 300 to 300 to 110 to 110 to 50 to 111 to 11 to 11 to 2

The plaintiff is dissatisfied with this.