The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff, including the part arising from the supplementary participation.

1. Whether the project approval of the instant case violates the public interest, necessity, and proportional principle

A. Business approval is an act of establishing a specific right of expropriation on the condition that a public project operator should take a certain procedure subsequent to the determination of land, etc. for a public project as a project to expropriate or use land, etc.

Therefore, even if a project falls under a project that can expropriate or use land, etc. in external shape, it is necessary to properly compare the interests of the persons related to the project approval with the public interest and private interest as well as the public interest and private interest, even if the project is public interest and public interest, and the comparative bridge must conform to the principle of proportionality.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 95Nu4889, Dec. 5, 1995; 2004Du14670, Apr. 29, 2005). In order to protect cultural heritage, the Cultural Heritage Protection Act grants the competent administrative authority the authority to choose a method less than the right to expropriate, such as prohibiting or restricting certain acts, installing facilities, removing obstacles, and taking emergency measures necessary for preserving cultural heritage.

However, cultural heritage is artificially or naturally formed national, ethnic, or world heritage of outstanding historic, artistic, academic, or scenic value (Article 2(1) of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act), and the basic principle of preserving, managing, and utilizing cultural heritage is to maintain its original form.

(Article 3 of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act). Also, cultural heritage is often difficult to recover if it is damaged once, and there are many characteristics that require enormous costs and time even if it is possible to recover.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Du10661, Jan. 28, 2005). Whether a disposition such as project approval for the preservation of cultural heritage is abuse of discretion.