1. On April 23, 2018, the Defendant’s disposition of non-acceptance of an urban management planning proposal made against the Plaintiff shall be revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 25, 2017, the Plaintiff obtained a license for the electric generation business with the following contents from the Defendant as a corporation operating solar power generation business.

The contents of the project: The place of the solar power generation project: Yeongdeungpo-si B, C Land Supply voltage: 22,90V facility capacity: 90km facility capacity: 19,834m2: 19,834m2

B. Around December 2017, the Plaintiff proposed an urban management planning proposal to propose that “it shall make the Defendant decide to create the power generation facilities, which are the power supply facilities, as the urban planning facilities, in accordance with Article 26 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) in order to install and operate solar power generation facilities (hereinafter “instant power generation facilities”) on the 71,362 square meters of a total of 12 square meters of land in attached Table 13,810 square meters (hereinafter “the instant application site”).

C. On April 23, 2018, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that it would not accept the proposal for formulating the above urban management plan (hereinafter “instant disposition”), and the reasons therefor are as follows.

▣ 검토결과 : 주민 의견 수렴 및 검토결과 주민반대에 따라 제안을 불수용

D. The statutes related to the disposition of this case are as shown in attached Form 2.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1 through 4 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion of this case is unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretion for the following reasons.

1) The grounds for “resident’s opposition” presented by the Defendant are not legitimate criteria for examining whether the Plaintiff’s drafting proposal is acceptable and unreasonable. (ii) Even if the Plaintiff satisfies all the requirements for formulating an urban management plan, the Defendant examines whether the requirements stipulated in Article 26 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act are met or is stipulated in Article 27 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act before rendering the instant disposition.