1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 11, 2006, the Minister of Construction and Transportation publicly announced the Defendant as the project implementer of the housing site development project in B district (hereinafter “instant project”) under the Ministry of Construction and Transportation announcement C on July 1, 2006, and on January 18, 2007, approved and publicly notified the designation and alteration of the instant planned project area and the housing site development plan.

A person who operates a livestock farming business in a facility (based on fences, and including livestock raising facilities and playgrounds) with a capacity of at least 300 square meters, such as livestock pens, etc., in the relevant business district, and has received compensation for livestock farming loss from the 18th day ( June 29, 2004) to the first 18th day of the adjudication on expropriation (based on fences, and including livestock raising facilities and playgrounds) to the first 200 square meters, such as livestock pens, etc., and received compensation for livestock farming loss from the facility (based on fences, including livestock raising facilities and playgrounds) with a capacity of at least 200 square meters, such as livestock pens, from the first 18th day before the date of the adjudication on expropriation (based on fences) to the first

B. On February 26, 2014, the Defendant informed the Plaintiff of the implementation of livelihood measures pursuant to Article 78 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”); among them, the details related to the instant case (the supply of the commercial site to livestock farmers; hereinafter “instant standard”) are as follows.

C. On April 30, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the selection of the Plaintiff as a person eligible for supply of the land for livelihood countermeasures as a livestock farmer. However, on June 29, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the result of the review of the B livelihood countermeasures that the Plaintiff did not constitute a person eligible for livelihood measures on the ground that it cannot be confirmed that the Plaintiff had operated his/her business prior to the base date set in the instant standard.

The Plaintiff on July 28, 2015

C. Although the Defendant filed an objection against the written notification, the Defendant filed the objection against the Plaintiff on August 31, 2015.

for the same reason.