1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 15, 2010, B purchased D Forest land 5,355 square meters in Daegu-gun, Daegu-gun, which was designated as a development restriction zone from C on December 15, 2010 (hereinafter “instant forest”). On the 10th of the same month, B obtained permission for land transaction contract by setting the purpose of use from the Defendant for forestry.

B. Around 2015, the Plaintiff, the father of B, cultivated crops in the 1,300 square meters of the instant forest land (hereinafter “instant arable land”).

C. On August 27, 2015 and October 2, 2010 of the same year, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to take corrective measures and corrective measures to restore the instant cultivated land to its original state pursuant to Article 30(1) of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones (hereinafter “Development Restriction Zones Act”) on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Article 12 of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones by doing an act of changing the form and quality of land, such as farming, in the instant cultivated land without permission.

However, the Plaintiff did not restore the instant arable land to its original state.

Accordingly, on November 11, 2015, the Defendant imposed a non-performance penalty of KRW 588,900 on the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 30-2(1)2 of the Development Restriction Zone Act (hereinafter “the first disposition”), and the Plaintiff received the written disposition following the following day.

E. The Defendant once again falls under the case of February 12, 2016 and the same year.

3. On two occasions, on May 19, 2016, a disposition was issued to the Plaintiff to impose KRW 588,900 on the charge for compelling the performance, following the procedure for notifying the Plaintiff of the scheduled imposition of the charge for compelling the performance (hereinafter “the second disposition”), and the Plaintiff:

5. 23. Receipt of the above disposition

F. The Defendant on August 12, 2016 and the same year

9. 22. On two occasions, the Plaintiff requested correction and correction of the instant farmland, following the procedure of notification of scheduled imposition of enforcement fines. The Plaintiff on November 17, 2016.