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

A. On March 21, 2000, Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant land”) registered as a asphalt factory in the area of 3,773 square meters of land for a factory in the Gu-si, Gu-si (hereinafter “the instant land”), and has produced a asphalt.

A. The conditions of approval for the change of the type of business of the company name B(Plaintiff) prior to the change of manufacturing facilities of the factory site B(Plaintiff) in the name of the company that is the representative of the company that is divided under subparagraph 6 of A and the change of the type of business are to be issued (No. 6, No. 2, No. 17-2, No. 17) and the conditions of approval for the change of the change of the type of business after the change of 1508.44, 205.78.57 reduction or decrease of the business on the business of ready-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, 205.3.47

2. Matters and conditions to be treated as authorized or permitted by the approved matters: None.

3. Matters that require separate approval.

(a) Building permit under Article 8 of the Building Act (including sewage treatment facilities);

(b) Report on the installation of discharging facilities of atmosphere, wastewater, noise, vibration and wastewater under Article 9 of the Noise and Vibration Control Act;

(c) Reporting on the waste discharger at the business place under the Wastes Management Act;

(d) When constructing a factory site, a report on a project generating scattering dust and a prior report on specific construction works shall be filed not later than three days prior to the commencement of the project;

B. On October 27, 2005, the Plaintiff completed the modification of registration of factory from “B (representative Plaintiff)” to “B (representative Plaintiff),” and on the same day, obtained approval from the Defendant for the modification of the type of factory extension business (hereinafter “approval for the establishment of factory”) as follows pursuant to Article 13 of the Industrial Cluster Development and Factory Establishment Act and Article 19(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.

C. On March 19, 2013, the Defendant issued a prior notice to the Plaintiff on the ground that the instant permit for establishment was revoked pursuant to Article 13-5 subparag. 3 of the Factory Establishment Act on the ground that “the instant permit for establishment was not filed within four years after the permit for establishment was granted,” and received the written opinion from the Plaintiff, and then submitted the written opinion to the Plaintiff on May 27, 2013.