1. The Defendant’s application for permission for development activities against the Plaintiff on April 16, 2019.

1. Circumstances and details of the disposition;

A. On March 7, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission on development activities for installation of solar power generation facilities (hereinafter “instant development activities”) with a power generation capacity of 70 kmW on the ground of 830 square meters in Jeonju-gun, Jeonju-gun (hereinafter “instant project application site”).

(hereinafter “instant application”). (b)

On April 3, 2019, the Defendant requested a deliberation of the Committee on Full-Time Gun Planning, and the Committee on Full-Time Gun Planning decided to review the site on April 3, 2019.

On April 2, 2019 after checking the site of the application for the instant project, the Committee passed a review on the instant application on April 2, 2019, and passed a decision to reject the application on the ground that it is improper for the location of solar power infrastructure to be located in the solar power infrastructure because, as part of the concentrated farmland, the development of solar power infrastructure has a significant impact on the residents’ sentiments by creating solar power infrastructure.

C. On April 16, 2019, the Defendant rendered a non-permission disposition on the instant application to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The instant application is inappropriate for the installation of solar power facilities on the ground that it has a significant impact on the residents’ sentiments due to the deterioration with the landscape of agricultural and fishing villages when installing solar power facilities as part of the grouped excellent farmland” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, 7, Eul evidence No. 1 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of whole pleadings

2. The details of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes are as shown in attached statutes;

3. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant disposition

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is the planned area of the instant project, which is actually being used as a production management area, and cannot be deemed as the planned area of good farmland, as well as the surrounding areas that may be damaged by the instant development activities.