1. On November 20, 2017, among the instant lawsuits, the part concerning the request for revocation of permission to use state forests, the renewal of the period for permission to use state forests, shall be dismissed.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company whose extracting rights are registered under the following table (hereinafter “the extracting rights of this case”).

The registration number of the location of a mining area and the registration number of the location of the mining area shall be the area of mining area, the area of mining land, the area of mining land, the area of mining area B CD old group B CD old group B 137 December 12, 1997 to November 30, 2017.

On May 22, 2015, the Plaintiff obtained permission from the Defendant to use state forests (the renewal period) with regard to “use: For the purpose of mining use, from April 1, 2015 to November 30, 2017, with respect to the area of 7,593 square meters (hereinafter “instant state forests”) among the area of 6,183,536 square meters in Gangseo-gun, Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-gun, which is a state forest.”

C. On October 26, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for permission to extend the term of the extracting rights of this case with the head of the mining registration office.

On October 27, 2017, the head of the mining registration office rejected an application for the extension of the above permission under Article 70 subparagraph 1-2 of the Mining Industry Act on the ground that the application period under Article 4 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Mining Industry Act (the period from one to three months before the expiration of the mining right) is too excessive.

(hereinafter referred to as “disposition of Non-repair on October 27, 2017”).

On November 2, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for renewal of the period of permission to use state forests in this case.

Accordingly, on November 20, 2017, the Defendant rendered an interim reply to the Plaintiff on November 20, 2017, stating that “The term of the extracting right of this case is until November 30, 2017, and the said term is not extended, so long as the said term is not extended, the Defendant cannot renew the permitted term of use.” Thus, “the interim reply to the application for renewal of the permitted term of use of state forests” (hereinafter referred to as “the instant interim reply”).

AB made it.

E. On November 29, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for postponement of the period of validity of the permission to use state forests in this case.

However, on December 6, 2017, the defendant renewed the permission period for use of state forests on the ground that the term of extracting rights in this case has expired.