1. A preserved mountainous district, on March 21, 2016, which is located on the 11,548 square meters of forests and fields B located in Gyeong-dong, Chungcheongnam-do, Do Governor, Chungcheongnam-do.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the instant forest.

B. The forest of this case was designated as the Korea Marine National Park Zone on December 31, 1968, and on July 1, 1981, it was designated as a preserved forest under the former Forestry Act (amended by Act No. 4206 of July 14, 1990; hereinafter the same shall apply) on the ground that it constitutes a park area. Since the Management of Mountainous Districts Act (amended by Act No. 6841 of Dec. 30, 2002), it was designated as a preserved mountainous district (amended by Act No. 6841 of Dec. 26, 2008) and maintained until now.

C. On January 10, 2011, the Ministry of Environment conducted a feasibility study of national parks. The instant forest was released from the Korea Marine National Park Zone as it was recognized as an area not suitable for park use and less conservation value as a natural park and not suitable for park use.

After that, the forest of this case was changed from the natural environment conservation area to the agricultural area according to the decision of management plan of the sub-dong-gun.

On February 24, 2014 and July 29, 2015, the head of Si/Gun filed an application with the Gyeongnam-do Governor for the cancellation of the preserved mountainous district of this case on two occasions, and the Gyeongnam-do Governor requested the Defendant to approve the cancellation of preserved mountainous district, and both the Defendant issued a disposition of refusal.

E. On February 25, 2016, the head of Si/Gun filed an application for the cancellation of preserved mountainous district on the ground that it constitutes a mountainous district of class D as a result of the evaluation of mountainous district characteristics of the instant forest, with the Do governor, and the Do governor requested the Defendant to approve the cancellation of preserved mountainous district.

On March 21, 2016, the Defendant notified the Do governor of the fact that “The First Division of the Central Mountainous District Management Committee in 2016 and the result of deliberation that the cancellation of preserved mountainous districts was inappropriate due to the surrounding conditions of the mountainous district and was rejected.”

(hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"). . [Grounds for recognition] did not dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 1 through 4 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and all pleadings.