1. The claim of this case is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff is a member of the family council No. 2-3 in the case of a o-si o-si in the case of a o-si

(b) Water quality management - Water supply plan - Groundwater development plan (250 cubic meters/day x two places);

5. Matters to be observed;

(a) The approving agency;

B. A business operator (3) fails to commence a project within five years from the date of receiving the notification of the contents of consultation pursuant to Article 21 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Act and Article 31 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, where construction is resumed after suspension for at least seven years, or where the project plan is to be modified more than the scope subject to a re-consultation, a re-preparation statement shall be submitted to the head of the approving agency prior to the implementation of the relevant project, and where the contents of consultation are changed due to the change of the project plan, etc. not subject to re-consultation pursuant to Article 22(1) of the same Act and Article 32(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the plan for environmental conservation shall be examined by the head of the approving agency in advance.

(i) [Facts without dispute over the basis of recognition, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 7, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1 obtained permission from the defendant to develop and utilize groundwater for "7,00 cubic meters of groundwater volume" 2,000 cubic meters, which is under the Environmental Impact Assessment Act.