1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On February 2015, the Plaintiffs filed an application with the Defendant for permission to engage in activities within a development-restricted zone (such as changing the form and quality of land) in order to cultivate the original agricultural site (a vinyl) and 685 square meters as an orchard with respect to the area of 850 square meters (hereinafter “instant forest”) among the area of 4,485 square meters in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul, which is owned by the Plaintiffs (hereinafter “instant forest”).

B. On March 18, 2015, the Defendant issued a provisional notification to the Plaintiffs on the ground that “the permission to reclaim land in accordance with the Rearrangement of Agricultural and Fishing Villages Act is only an Eup/Myeon area, and the forest of this case is an urban area under a land utilization plan, and does not constitute an area subject to the permission to reclaim land stipulated in the Rearrangement of Agricultural and Fishing Villages Act” to the Plaintiffs.

C. Around May 2015, the Plaintiffs filed an application with the Defendant for the selection of land subject to clearing under Article 7(2) of the Rearrangement of Agricultural and Fishing Villages Act (hereinafter “instant application”) while reclaiming the land of 165 square meters in the instant forest as an original agricultural site (a vinyl) and 685 square meters in the instant forest as an orchard site.

On June 10, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting the instant application for the following reasons (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The forest of this case is an area within a development restriction zone. As a result of measuring the gradient of the forest of this case and on-site verification, it does not conform to the provisions of subparagraph 1 of Article 14 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the Development Restriction Zones”). Article 12(8) of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones (hereinafter “Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones”), and Article 22(Attachment 2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Development Restriction Zones Act (hereinafter “Ground for Disposition”). (hereinafter “Ground for Disposition 2”), the forest of this case is an area within a development restriction zone, and the forest of this case is not in conflict with the provisions of subparagraph 1 of Article 14 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones.