1. On July 21, 2017, the Defendant paid farmland preservation charges for two parcels, other than the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, the Plaintiff on July 21, 201.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 4, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a project plan for housing construction (hereinafter “instant project”) with the content that each unit of apartment houses (multi-unit houses), Class I neighborhood living facilities (tail stores) and guard room (total building area: 858.12 square meters, number of households: 99 square meters) was constructed (hereinafter “instant project”).

B. The Defendant issued a notice to the Plaintiff to impose farmland preservation charges of KRW 158,700,00 on the instant land through Defendant Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) on July 21, 2017, after consultation on farmland conversion pursuant to Article 19 of the Housing Act and Article 34 of the Farmland Act regarding the land located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Incheon (hereinafter referred to as “ri and Seo-gu”) pursuant to Article 19 of the Housing Act and Article 34 of the Farmland Act, after consultation on farmland conversion pursuant to Article 158,70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000,00,00,00,00.

(hereinafter the Defendant’s disposition of imposition of farmland compensation on July 21, 2017 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

On September 19, 2017, the Defendant approved the housing construction project plan to the Plaintiff.

[Ground for Recognition: Fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 4 through 6, and Eul evidence 5]

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. Since the instant land was changed from around 1980 to around 1990 to a general residential area after the construction of a detached house became a de facto site due to the construction of a detached house, it was entirely converted without holding the substance of the farmland.

Therefore, since the instant land does not constitute farmland subject to farmland preservation charges at the time when the Plaintiff obtained approval of the housing construction project plan, the instant disposition should be revoked as unlawful.

B. 422 square meters of a road site shall be the business in this case.