1. On June 18, 2018, the Defendant Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission provides C waste treatment services between Defendant C and two other parties.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company established on March 7, 2014 for the purpose of running a facility business to prevent environmental pollution, a construction facility business, and a waste landfill business.

B. On July 24, 2017, the Plaintiff submitted a business plan on the final waste disposal facilities (management-type landfill facilities, landfill capacity 1,89,000 cubic meters) for general wastes at the place of business to operate the final waste disposal business in the area of 88,448 square meters (hereinafter “instant site”).

C. On September 28, 2017, November 9, 2017, and December 26, 2017, the Plaintiff submitted a revised business plan and an environmental survey report, etc., upon a request to supplement the Defendant’s chemical market more than three times. On January 24, 2018, the Plaintiff received a notice of conformity with the waste disposal business plan under Article 25(2) of the Wastes Control Act (hereinafter “instant notice of conformity”).

On February 8, 2018, the Plaintiff submitted a proposal for formulating an urban management plan (urban planning facilities: waste disposal facilities and roads) pursuant to Article 26 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) to Defendant Czesung City Mayor.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant proposal”). (e)

On May 30, 2018, in accordance with Article 26(2) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, the Defendant U.S. Mayor issued a disposition of refusal to formulate an urban management plan (waste disposal facilities) on the following grounds (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The instant project site is inappropriate as the site location is anticipated to cause environmental and scenic damage to the surrounding area when a waste disposal facility is created in an area adjacent to the Eriri natural settlement district, F district, farmland, etc. Meanwhile, on April 26, 2018, the Defendant Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Committee”) filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant notification of conformity with the Defendant’s Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Committee”), and the Defendant Committee filed an administrative appeal on June 18, 2018.