1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 7, 1995, the Plaintiff: (a) obtained a farmland diversion permit with respect to the farmland of 486 square meters for the purpose of construction of a warehouse with respect to the farmland of 1,247 square meters for the purpose of construction of a warehouse; (b) installed a factory of 1,692 square meters for storage of 1,297 square meters for the purpose of construction of a warehouse; (c) 278 square meters for E forest; and (d) 1,698 square meters for F forest, without obtaining a farmland diversion permit; and (e) installed a factory of 1,298 square meters for storage of 392 square meters for the purpose of construction of a warehouse.

B was prosecuted for the above facts constituting the crime, and was sentenced to a fine of five million won for violation of the Farmland Act, etc. by the Cheongju District Court (No. 97Da1711) on December 23, 1997, and was sentenced to a fine of five million won for violation of the Farmland Act, etc. from the Defendant on three occasions from July 30, 199 to December 6, 200, but did not implement reinstatement.

B. Meanwhile, on May 13, 2016 after the Plaintiff acquired ownership of the farmland in this case, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission to divert farmland for the purpose of constructing a Class II neighborhood living facility (manufacturing Facility), but the Defendant rendered a disposition to return the permission to divert farmland (hereinafter “instant return disposition”) with the following purport on May 25, 2016.

The reason for the return of the farmland in this case is that the farmland in this case must be restored to the farmland that was subject to a fine on July 4, 1997, by notifying the order of restoration to the original state and filing a complaint on the order of restoration to the original state on two occasions, and that the farmland in this case should be restored to the farmland that was subject to an administrative disposition, such as the improvement of administrative vicarious execution over three occasions, and in particular, the following replys have been received as a result of the inquiry about whether it is possible to grant permission of diversion of farmland on December 2, 2015 without reinstatement to the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, and the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, or through the procedures for diversion of farmland such as the report of diversion of farmland under Article 34 of the Farmland Act or the report of diversion of farmland under Article 35 of the Farmland Act, if the farmland is diverted without such procedures,