1. The Defendant’s disposition of non-permission to engage in development activities against the Plaintiffs on December 6, 2016 is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 8, 2016, Plaintiff A obtained a license for an electric power generation business under the Electric Utility Act with the content of conducting solar power generation business from the Defendant in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Da, and E’s land, and Plaintiff B from the Defendant on August 4, 2016, the content of which is to conduct solar power generation business with the following content in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and E’s land:

Plaintiff A, on June 8, 2016, the preparatory period for the project, the supply of equipment and facilities and voltage frequencies for the project, Plaintiff A, June 8, 2016, 9.20kw (Bater 9.4kw) on June 7, 2019 380V 60Hz Plaintiff B B on August 3, 2016 - August 2, 2019

On November 2016, the Plaintiffs filed an application with the Defendant for permission to engage in development activities (hereinafter referred to as “instant development activities”) to install solar power facilities (such as 3,904 square meters in the applied area, 3,766 square meters in site, and 138 square meters in an access to land (hereinafter referred to as “instant application site”).

C. On December 6, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting the Plaintiffs’ application for permission to engage in development activities (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “The instant application is adjacent to approximately 10 meters to the local highway G where the instant application is filed, and there is a risk of undermining the surrounding natural landscape at the time of solar installation, and is not in compliance with Article 4(1) of the Regulations on the Operation of solar power infrastructure in Taean-gun (hereinafter “instant regulations”).

The Plaintiffs were dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Chungcheongnam-do Administrative Appeals Commission, Chungcheongnam-do, but were dismissed on February 27, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers, 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 defendant permitted the power generation business to the plaintiffs, but the disposition of this case was inconsistent with the preceding act and constitutes a violation of the principle of trust protection.

② The provision of this case is merely an internal business rule, and there is no legal nature.