1. The Defendant’s disposition of non-conformity with the waste treatment business plan issued to the Plaintiff on August 20, 2015 is revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that runs a comprehensive food waste recycling business and ancillary business.

B. On June 24, 2015, the Plaintiff submitted a waste treatment business plan with the following content to the Defendant:

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant business plan” and the projects pertaining thereto are referred to as the “instant business”). Wastes subject to comprehensive waste recycling business: Food wastes (scale: 90 tons/day): 75 tons/day (raw waste treatment plants, composts, composts): The area of business: the area of area, land category A, planned control area, area for which facilities and equipment are to be installed nationwide, and 7,078§³.

C. On August 20, 2015, the Defendant issued a non-conformity notice to the instant project plan on the ground that “to accept the residents’ opposing opinion that is likely to have an adverse impact on the downcoming and living environment due to malodor in the neighboring area,” pursuant to Article 25(2)4 of the Wastes Control Act.

(hereinafter “Disposition of this case”). 【Disposition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s Nos. 1 through 3 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is planned to install food waste disposal facilities by eco-friendly method without generating wastewater and malodor. The Plaintiff has no residential area within 1 km from the planned area of the instant project, and the planned area of the instant project is surrounded by mountain, and it cannot be deemed that the instant project adversely affects neighboring residents or surrounding environment.

Nevertheless, given that the Defendant did not notify the instant business plan on the grounds of civil petitions filed by the vague concerns of neighboring residents, the instant disposition is unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretion.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

(c)each of the evidence, Gap evidence, Eul evidence, Eul evidence Nos. 4 to 14, Eul evidence No. 1 to 8 prior to the facts of recognition and all of the arguments.