1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. 1) Approval and notification of an execution plan for electric power resource development business 1) The Defendant is to construct 154kV P transmission line (hereinafter “instant project”) in order to meet the demand for new power due to the creation of N and Pyeongtaek-siO.

On or around March 5, 2008, the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy (at the time of change of name, the Minister of Knowledge Economy, and the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy, regardless of whether before or after change of name.

2) The execution plan for electric power resource development business for the instant business (hereinafter referred to as “instant implementation plan”).

(2) On September 2, 2010, pursuant to Article 5 of the former Electric Power Source Development Promotion Act (amended by Act No. 11690, Mar. 23, 2013), the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy applied for the approval of the implementation plan for the instant project, such as the construction of electric transmission lines of 13.428 km in length (hereinafter “electric transmission line”) and the steel tower (hereinafter “electric transmission tower”) supporting it, publicly announced to U.N. on September 13, 2010 as U.N., the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy publicly announced the implementation plan of the instant project, such as the construction of the electric transmission line of 13.428 km in length and the steel tower (hereinafter “instant transmission line”).

B. On the other hand, the defendant, at around August 2006, sought opinions from the head of the VA group about whether there exists any conflict of military operations and any impediment to military operations, etc. in the area where the scheduled course of the transmission line newly established for the business of this case was included in the reply that "the conditional consent shall be given under the condition that it goes against 100 meters or more from the outer fence of the neighboring military unit" around November 2006. However, after the application for the approval of the implementation plan of this case, the defendant living in the WU (hereinafter referred to as "WU"), or possessing the land in that area, and reflected the reply that "the consent shall be given under the condition that it goes against military operations" at least 10 meters from the outer fence of the neighboring military unit.