1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 25, 1972, the Plaintiff’s permission for a liquefied petroleum gas filling business and permission for a liquefied petroleum gas filling station Kimpo-ri was designated as a development restriction zone pursuant to the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones (hereinafter “Development Restriction Zone Act”). The Plaintiff has resided in the development restriction zone prior to the designation of the development restriction zone.

On March 30, 2015, the Defendant determined that “it shall be a resident at the time of designation of a development restriction zone” as a qualification to obtain permission for the filling business of liquefied petroleum gas within the development restriction zone and permission for the construction of liquefied petroleum gas filling stations within the development restriction zone, while publishing a modified plan for the placement of liquefied petroleum gas filling stations for automobiles within the development restriction zone.

The Plaintiff, as a resident residing in a development-restricted zone since the designation of the development-restricted zone, applied for permission to construct a liquefied petroleum gas charging station on the Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, E, F, G, and H’s land that meets the qualification requirements and permission to conduct liquefied petroleum gas filling business under the name of “I” in the filling station, and obtained permission to conduct liquefied petroleum gas filling business from the Defendant on August 21, 2015, and obtained permission to conduct liquefied petroleum gas filling business (hereinafter “instant building permission”). On September 8, 2015, the Plaintiff obtained permission to build a liquefied petroleum gas filling station (hereinafter “instant building permission”).

B. On December 28, 2015, the Plaintiff, upon receipt of a proposal from the J, that he/she borrowed the name of the Plaintiff to obtain permission to charge liquefied petroleum gas in a development-restricted zone, and the J accepted such proposal. On May 2015, the fact that the Plaintiff is the nominal holder and the Plaintiff obtained permission, but the Plaintiff was in collusion with the J by obtaining permission to charge liquefied petroleum gas in the name of the Plaintiff, as the Plaintiff actually obtained permission.