1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. 1) The Plaintiff had already constructed a stable on the ground of 6,003 square meters in the area of 2,556.23 square meters in the present building area (2,192.5 square meters in rainhouse, 363.73 square meters in composthouse, hereinafter “existing stable of this case”).

(2) On May 17, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for a construction permit with the Defendant to extend animal and plant-related facilities (hereinafter “the instant application site”) on the ground of 12,286 square meters in aggregate of 13,913 square meters in the previous livestock shed site in the instant case and in the adjacent voice-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, and the 13,913 square meters in size (hereinafter “instant application site”).

(hereinafter “instant application”). (b)

This case's disposition and administrative appeal process

(a) Environmental damage occurs to neighboring areas, such as the generation of malodor due to the characteristics of business, etc., and if livestock excreta, etc. generated in the course of operating livestock pens are discharged, direct and indirect damage is anticipated to occur to neighboring residents' health and environment;

The date of receipt of an application for a construction permit shall be based on the date of the disposition in question, and the currently permitted area is not permitted as a restricted area for raising livestock. 1) On August 31, 2017, the Defendant issued a non-permission disposition against the Plaintiff on the ground of the following (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(2) The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition with the Chungcheongbuk-do Administrative Appeals Commission, but the said administrative appeals commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on December 27, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, 6, 7 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant disposition

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant’s Civil Petitions Treatment Act (hereinafter “Civil Petitions Treatment Act”)

Since the processing period of the instant application was unfairly delayed in violation of the B/L, this case.