1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 8, 2017, the Plaintiff obtained an electric utility business license for the solar power generation business of 2,937.60kW in the instant application form from the Gyeongnam-do Governor.

B. On June 1, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission to engage in development activities for solar power generation business (hereinafter “instant development activities”) regarding the instant application form (hereinafter “instant application”).

On July 17, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting development activities (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “The instant application is not in harmony with the surrounding environment or landscape pursuant to Article 58(1)4 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”), and the access road was not secured pursuant to Article 2(1)11 of the Building Act and Article 12(12) of the Enforcement Decree of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act.”

C. On the other hand, on October 30, 2017, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that “Article 20(6) [Attachment 4] of the Enforcement Decree of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act shall be subject to the scope of application of the standards for permission for mountainous district conversion and Article 12(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act” under Article 20(6) [Attachment 4] of the Enforcement Decree of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act as “Article 20(1)11 of the previous Building Act and Article 12(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act.” [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap’s 2, 3, 6, 7 evidence

each entry and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Attached Form 2 of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: ① the uncertainty of the grounds for disposition, ② the deviation and abuse of discretionary power, ③ the illegality of the procedure, ④ the violation of the principle of trust protection.

B. As to the allegation of uncertainty of the grounds for disposition 1, the Plaintiff is merely indicating the grounds for disposition of the instant case, and the Defendant is not allowed to file the instant application for any specific reason.