1. The disposition that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on August 9, 2016 rejection of the application for building permission shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Details of the disposition

On June 9, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a building permit with the content that he/she constructs two animal and plant-related facilities (stock death) of 4,141.9 square meters in total on the ground (hereinafter “instant application site”) and one animal and plant-related facilities (stock death) of 4,141.9 square meters in total on the ground of 5,582 square meters (hereinafter “instant application site”).

(hereinafter “instant application”). On August 9, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that “The Plaintiff shall return the instant application pursuant to Article 25 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Handling of Civil Petitions, on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s request for supplementation was impossible to install livestock excreta discharge facilities to an area not exceeding 1,000 meters in which part of the restriction on livestock raising is restricted pursuant to the former Ordinance on the Restriction on Livestock Raising of Cheongnam-do Budget (amended by Ordinance No. 2356, Apr. 7, 2017; hereinafter the “instant Ordinance”). However, the Defendant failed to supplement the deadline, and thus, notified the Plaintiff that “the Plaintiff shall return it pursuant to the provisions of

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Chungcheongnam-do Administrative Appeals Commission, however, the Chungcheongnam-do Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on October 24, 2016.

The plaintiff's assertion that the disposition of this case in this case is legitimate for the following reasons shall be revoked for the following reasons. (In the absence of any dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including a serial number, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleading.

The term "housing congested area" means a natural village formed in at least five houses (the sole and multi-family housing under attached Table 1) (Article 2 subparagraph 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Building Act) (Article 2 subparagraph 3 of the Ordinance), which does not fall under the residential congested area.

In addition, the nearest distance to C’s accommodation among the boundary of the instant application site is about 1,100 meters, and the 870m claimed by the Defendant is up to C’s fence.

Therefore, the application of this case is "5."