1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

Defendant limited to the Plaintiff on October 23, 2013.

The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, inasmuch as Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act are the same as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, among the judgment of the court of first instance, the grounds for admitting this case are as follows: “The Act on Promotion of Installation of Waste Disposal Facilities and Assistance, etc. to Their Environs, etc.” until September 9 through 10 of the judgment of the court of first instance is amended by Act No. 12077, Aug. 13, 2013 and enforced February 14, 2014.

A. The Act provides that “the Act shall be

1) The sum total of waste disposal facilities and food waste disposal facilities installed in the 10th 10th 12th 10th 10th 3th 10th 12th 2th 2th 2th 3th 2th 3th 2th 3th 2th 3th 3th 3th 3th 3th 3th 2006, each of the following dates.

(3) The illegality of the part of the installation cost of this case, which includes the installation cost of the facility of this case, is subject to the installation cost per ton of the standard unit cost of the facility installation cost under the “Guidelines for the Integrated Processing of Government Subsidies Subsidies for Waste Disposal Facilities, 2013” as prescribed by the Ministry of Environment, and the standard unit cost includes the installation cost of the facility of convenience facilities equivalent to 10% of the installation cost. Therefore, in calculating the installation cost of this case, only 100/110 of the installation cost of the facility of this case can be recognized as the installation cost of the facility of this case.

"No. 21, 25, and 26 of A" shall be written on the 8th five pages of the judgment of the first instance (based on recognition).