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 13, 2013, the Plaintiff obtained a construction permit and permission for development activities from the Defendant, and carried out new construction works and development activities (hereinafter “instant project”) around August 13, 2013, in order to construct a VR pipe and waterway manufacturing factory and ready-mixed factory on a 29,285 square meters of forest and field B 33,395 square meters of forest and field B in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun.

B. After that, the Plaintiff partially modified the permitted matters (area: 29,05 square meters, purpose: the new construction of ready-mixed factories): and accordingly, obtained approval for the use of new buildings around May 18, 2017.

C. Pursuant to the instant project, 29,05 square meters among B forest Nos. 33,395 square meters were registered as 29,055 square meters of land for a factory in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-do (hereinafter “instant project site”). D.

On May 18, 2017, upon receipt of a request from the Defendant to submit a statement of calculation of development costs, the Plaintiff submitted a report on the calculation of development costs (hereinafter “the instant report”) calculated as KRW 848,707,384 of the total development costs on July 4, 2017.

E. On August 23, 2017, the Defendant recognized only KRW 245,074,366, including KRW 319,620,392, excluding KRW 319,620,392, which was calculated by the Plaintiff based on the soil and sand transportation construction cost (hereinafter “the first application cost”), as development costs, and notified the Defendant of the scheduled imposition of development charges of KRW 251,69,070. (f) On September 21, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a request for review prior to the notification of development charges (hereinafter “request for review of this case”).

G. On October 17, 2017, the Defendant did not recognize the secondary deduction application cost as development cost, on the ground that “an objectively verified construction cost incurred in transporting soil and sand” and did not recognize the secondary deduction application cost as development cost, and recognized only acquisition tax and special agricultural and fishing villages tax as additional development cost and accordingly calculated accordingly, to the Defendant.