1. On October 19, 2018, the Defendant’s rejection disposition against the Plaintiffs regarding the application for permission for development activities is revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiffs filed an application for permission to engage in development activities with the Defendant around October 2018, in order to install solar power facilities on the 15,458 square meters of Gangwon-gun M, Gangwon-gun and five parcels (hereinafter “instant application site”).

(hereinafter “instant application”). (b)

On October 19, 2018, the Defendant issued a rejection disposition against the instant application for the following reasons:

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”). The entry of the Nancheon-gun Nancheon-gun Nancheon-gun, Gangwon-do Nancheon-gun, which is used as part of the current state among the roads for entry into and exit from the instant application site, is omitted.

O and P owners of each land received a civil petition for the non-use of the installation of solar power infrastructure from each owner of each land, so consultation with land owners or securing alternative access roads for entry.

b. 【Ground for Recognition】 A without any dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, and 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On the access roads leading to the instant application place by the Plaintiffs (hereinafter “instant access roads”); on Q and other O land, the sole ownership of Q Q and other three co-ownership of P land; on the other hand, the ownership of P and other three owners is stated as “ Q, etc.” without distinction by land for convenience.

Part of the O and P land owned by this owner (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) is included.

However, the current status of this case is already formed before several hundreds, and it has been used by many and unspecified persons, such as neighboring military units and village residents, so there is no particular obstacle to entering the site of this case through the current status system.

Furthermore, the Plaintiffs made efforts to pay and consult for a reasonable price to Q and village-based R with respect to the passage of the instant land at issue. However, Q and R consistently failed to accept the said demand in an abuse of rights, such as demanding Q and R to pay KRW 120 million in cash.