1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons why the court of this case cited in the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except for the addition of "decision on the additional argument" as to the plaintiff's assertion added in this court, and therefore, it is identical to the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this case is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence

2. Determination on the additional argument

A. According to Article 8(1) of the Livestock Excreta Act, the head of a Si/Gun/Gu may designate an area falling under any of the areas enumerated in Article 8(1)1 through 5 of the Livestock Excreta Act as a restricted area for raising livestock by municipal ordinances of the relevant local government. Although the instant application area does not fall under any of the items under Article 8(1)1 through 5 of the Livestock Excreta Act, the instant public notice was issued to include the instant application area as a restricted area for raising livestock as a restricted area for raising livestock. Thus, the instant public notice and the instant disposition based thereon are unlawful against Article 8(1) of the Livestock Excreta Act. According to Article 8(1) of the same Act, the head of a Si/Gun/Gu may restrict raising livestock by designating and publicly announcing a certain area as prescribed by municipal ordinances of the relevant local government with respect to an area where restriction on raising livestock is deemed necessary for preserving the living environment of residents or preserving the quality of water sources.