1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance for the acceptance of the judgment is as follows: (a) the second and fifth "agricultural products simplified disposal facilities" in the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed as "simplified agricultural products collection centers", and (b) the second and second

C. Inasmuch as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. Parts in height:

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant statutes;

C. (1) Determination 1) Articles 36 and 37 of the Farmland Act; the former Enforcement Decree of the Farmland Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26754, Dec. 22, 2015; hereinafter “former Enforcement Decree of the Farmland Act”)

Article 37 provides for the procedure and criteria for examination of permission for temporary use of farmland for other purposes. The criteria for examination of permission for temporary use of farmland for other purposes are prescribed as indefinite concepts such as “whether it is worth preserving farmland due to the improvement of agricultural production infrastructure.” As such, the discretionary authority of an administrative agency is granted to determine whether to grant permission for temporary use of farmland for other purposes. Therefore, the issue of whether to grant permission for temporary use of farmland for other purposes belongs to the discretionary act of an administrative agency. In principle, the judicial review of discretionary act is limited to whether there is deviation or abuse of discretionary authority, taking into account the room for determining public interest at the discretion of an administrative agency. Unless there are other special circumstances where the standards established by an administrative agency in carrying out discretionary act are objectively unreasonable or unreasonable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2011Du29205, Dec. 13, 2012; 2010Du23033, Jan. 27, 2011).