1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From February 8, 2017, the Defendant: (a) in Sejong Special Self-Governing City; (b) in Sejong Special Self-Governing City and E land (hereinafter “the first application site”); (c) Plaintiff B was permitted to engage in solar power generation business on the land E (hereinafter “the second application site”); and (d) Plaintiff C was the F of Sejong Special Self-Governing City (hereinafter “the third application site”); and (e) the equipment capacity was 98.49kW, supply voltage was 380V, frequency was 60Hz, and project preparation period was 200 from February 8, 2017 to February 7, 2017.

B. On March 7, 2017, Plaintiff A filed an application with the Defendant, and Plaintiff B filed an application for development activities to install each solar power plant of the size of the site of 1,626 square meters in the area applied to the instant application site; Plaintiff B filed an application for the instant application site of this case; Plaintiff C filed an application for development activities to install each solar power plant of 1,349 square meters in the area applied to the instant application site in the instant application site of this case (hereinafter “instant development activities”).

C. On May 11, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting the Plaintiffs’ application for permission for the instant development activities on the ground that “In light of lack of data on noise, shielding re-covering problem due to the height of fences and sludges, anticipated damage to farmland, and their neighboring residential areas, it is inappropriate to be located, as it is difficult to harmonize with the neighboring local environment” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 4 (including provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion is that the disposition of this case in spite of the defendant's permission to generate electricity is against the principle of trust protection. ② The disposition of this case constitutes deviation and abuse of discretionary power, and ③ the defendant is similar to each application of this case.