1. The Defendant’s disposition of denying the development activities rendered against the Plaintiffs on July 31, 2015 is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 4, 2015, the Plaintiffs filed an application with the Defendant for permission for development activities pursuant to the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) in order to install solar power generation facilities, as shown in the attached Table 1 List, to the Defendant: (a) one of the former North Korean Armed Forces I (hereinafter “instant application site”).

B. On July 31, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition not to engage in development activities against the Plaintiffs on the following grounds (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Grounds for Non-permission of Development Acts] The fact that solar power infrastructure scheduled to be installed as a result of a on-site inspection is close to J Farm Village, the planting of trees for the purpose of shielding structures is not effective due to the height of the site, and is unlikely to damage village landscape such as infringement of the right to view village residents. [Grounds for Recognition] The fact that no dispute exists, Gap evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that there is no possibility of environmental pollution, etc., and thus, the residents’ living benefits are not infringed. The application of this case, immediately above the application of this case, it is difficult to view that there is a right to view that the speech and trees are particularly protected as living benefits because they prevent the front mountain, and it is not likely to harm the village landscape. The Plaintiffs invested enormous costs, such as purchasing an electricity business license to install solar power generation facilities and purchasing a project site, etc., which would be difficult to recover if the project of this case is interrupted. The Defendant permitted the installation of solar power generation facilities in the vicinity even before the disposition of this case, and the refusal of the application of this case against the Plaintiffs is against the principle of equality, and thus, the disposition of this case should be revoked because it is unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretion.

3. Attached Form 2 of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

4. As to the instant case, health belts, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 3.