1. On December 19, 2016, the Defendant’s revocation of each of the dispositions of non-permission on the electrical business with the Plaintiffs.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. The process of the disposition is that the name of the power plant (kW) where the location of the Plaintiff’s power plant is installed (N97.47 B P P, Q S, N97.47 C, N97.47 D S, T97.47, T97.47 U S, T97.47 U N, T97.47, T97.47 G, T97.47 G, WW N, N, Y97.47, W, Y97.47, W, Y97.47, Y97.47, Y97.47, Y97.47.47, Jacheon-si N, Y, Y97.47.47, Jacheon-si N, YAB, Y, Y97.47, YADM 47.7.47.7.

A. On November 7, 2016, the Plaintiffs filed an application for the permission of the electricity business with the Defendant to install solar power facilities on land, including Sacheon-si N, and the Plaintiff M applied for the permission of the electricity business with the Defendant on November 11, 2016 to install solar power facilities on the O.

The details of the application filed by the plaintiffs to the defendant are as follows:

B. According to Article 62(1)1(a) of the Enforcement Decree of the Electric Utility Act, with respect to the permission for the electric utility business whose power facility capacity is not more than 3,00 kilograms, a Mayor/Do Governor is the permitting authority delegated by the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy, and with respect to the permission for the electric business of not more than 300km, his/her authority is re-entrusted to the head of a Si/Gun in accordance with the ordinary south-do Administrative Delegation Regulations. On December 19, 2016, the Plaintiffs rendered each non-permission regarding the Plaintiffs’ permission for the electric business on

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The filing of an application for non-permission is a large number of matters that conflict with the standards for permission for development activities, such as damage to natural scenery and aesthetic view, noise, vibration, dust dust, etc. in the construction of a structure under Article 58(1)4 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, and permission is restricted for the prevention of difficult development. Article 18(1)5 of the Mountainous Districts Management Act provides that each non-permission disposition for the occurrence of forest disasters and the surrounding plaintiffs due to the large-scale diversion of forest, shall be deemed to be “consceptic ecosystems,” while the written non-permission disposition for the occurrence of forest disasters and

Permission for mountainous district conversion is likely to damage ecosystems or impede natural scenery.