1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the following parts, and thus, it is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The 5th written judgment of the first instance court shall consist of 16 to 19 parallels as follows:

7) On December 2016 through January 2017, the Defendant submitted a letter of commitment to pay, on behalf of the Plaintiff, the farmland diversion charges for the solar power plants to the head of Hongcheon-do on behalf of the Plaintiff by January 6, 2017, and by February 10, 2017, the Plaintiff paid the farmland diversion charges by the deadline for payment as above.

(1) The Defendant, on behalf of the Plaintiff, filed an application by changing the facility capacity to 3,50 kilograms on the ground of J land, including the part excluded from the application area in the process of applying for permission for development of L-powered power plants, on behalf of the Plaintiff, from around August of 2017. The Defendant filed an application by changing the facility capacity to 250.24kW (the equipment capacity after the change to 250.24km)

) An application was filed for permission for solar power generation projects to operate the “R-powered power plant” (On the other hand, on January 19, 2018, the Plaintiff obtained permission for solar power generation projects (capacity 250.24kW) with respect to the “R-powered power plant” on the ground from the head of Hongcheon-gun, 2018 upon the said application.

[Judgment of the court of first instance 2 to 5 acts on the 7th day of the judgment of the court of first instance

4) On September 5, 2017, the head of Hongcheon-gun: (a) held a residents explanatory meeting and requested the Plaintiff to reply to the result by September 19, 2017, on the ground that in relation to the Plaintiff’s application for the permission to operate the solar power generation project on the so-called solar power plant, “the residents’ objection was raised, such as the prediction of damage from landslides and soil outflow and the fear of leaving structures neglected.

7 pages 15 of the first instance judgment "Evidences 1, 3, 4, and 9 of the first instance judgment" shall be written with "Evidences 1, 3, 4, 9, 12, 19, 20 of the first instance judgment."

The 9th to 7th of the first instance judgment is as follows.