1. On December 23, 2016, the Defendant’s rejection disposition against the Plaintiff of the payment of the reward for investment attraction merit is revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is running real estate brokerage business under the trade name “C” in the Chungcheong-gun B of Chungcheongnam-do.

B. On July 11, 2016, the Plaintiff arranged investment attraction of KRW 7,575,964,025 to the Defendant, a company located in Seoul (hereinafter “instant company”)’s factory site located in Chungcheong E-ri and Fririwon G industrial complex (hereinafter “instant industrial complex”), so, the Plaintiff filed an application for payment of monetary rewards in accordance with Article 35 of the Ordinance on the Promotion of the Investment Inducement of Companies and Investment Inducement (hereinafter “instant Ordinance”) and Article 22(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the instant Ordinance.

C. On December 20, 2016, the U.S. Investment Inducement Committee deliberated on the instant application and rejected the proposal for the payment of the monetary reward. On December 23, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting the instant application on the ground that “the payment of the monetary reward was not possible as a result of a comprehensive examination of the provisions of Article 35 of the instant Ordinance and Article 22(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the instant Ordinance, and the response to the Plaintiff’s contribution to the Plaintiff, etc.” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 4, 8, 9, Eul evidence 1 to 5 (including provisional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. According to Articles 3 and 4 subparag. 5 of the instant Ordinance and Article 22(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the instant Ordinance, the Investment Attraction Committee shall deliberate and decide on whether to grant monetary rewards and the amount of subsidies, taking into account the degree of contribution, performance records, payment standards, etc. However, even if it is unclear whether the Investment Inducement Committee was held with respect to the instant application, and even if the Investment Attraction Committee was held, it does not request the Plaintiff to vindicate or attend the deliberation process and decision or give notice of such decision.