1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant’s provisional disposition of denial of construction made on September 1, 2011 is revoked.

3...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 16, 2011, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a construction permit for a Class 1 neighborhood living facility (a resting restaurant) with a total floor area of 134.70 square meters on the ground on the land of 599 square meters in Busan-gu B forest and C forest and 239 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

(hereinafter “instant application”). (b)

Accordingly, after consultation with relevant departments on September 1, 201, the Defendant rendered a non-permission disposition on the instant application on the grounds that permission for development activities (land form and quality change) was not granted due to the following reasons:

(1) The former National Land Planning and Utilization Act (amended by Act No. 10599, Apr. 14, 201); hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”).

Article 58(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 23718, Apr. 10, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply)

Article 56 of the Urban Planning Ordinance of Busan Metropolitan City (amended by Ordinance No. 4656, Aug. 10, 201; hereinafter “Municipal Ordinance”) is only referred to as “Municipal Ordinance”).

(2) Pursuant to Article 22 subparagraph 2 of the Ordinance, the gradient of the instant land exceeds the maximum gradient of 18 degrees of 37.8 degrees, in 37.8.

3) Pursuant to Article 22 Subparag. 8 of the Ordinance, the surrounding areas of the instant land are areas highly likely to cause disaster due to development activities, such as collapse of adjacent roads due to centralized rain on July 27, 2011. [The facts that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, A1, 2, 1, 2, 2-1, 2-1, 2-3, and 2-1 through 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of this case is unlawful as it is in violation of the discretionary authority, since it is not true or unreasonable for the following reasons, or there is no reasonable ground.

1) The instant land is a flat land that has almost little trees on the roadside, and since the Plaintiff constructed a single-story building, it does not harm the surrounding environment or landscape.