1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 11, 2015, the Plaintiff obtained permission for development of a general warehouse site (hereinafter “instant permission for development”) from the Defendant on a conditional basis, such as approval for use, etc. of agricultural infrastructure for entering a site for entry into and exit from Echeon-si (hereinafter “instant permission for development”) with respect to B 31 square meters and C B 1,157 square meters.

B. On December 14, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for approval of the use of agricultural infrastructure for the purpose other than the purpose of using the site for entry into a general warehouse with respect to the ditch site of this case (hereinafter “the ditch site of this case”), which is an agricultural infrastructure managed by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, for the purpose of using it as a site for entry into a general warehouse.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant application”). - In light of the field conditions, the instant ditch site is judged to be not suitable for the applicant’s entry into and exit from the private road opened and used for the purpose of development, and it is appropriate for the applicant to enter and exit from the private road for the purpose of development. The use of the ditch site for the purpose of creating legal requirements bypassing to the private road and adjacent land for the reason that consultation on use with the owner of the private road and adjacent land is difficult.

C. On January 28, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that he was not able to use agricultural infrastructure for the purpose other than the purpose of the instant ditch site pursuant to Article 23 of the Rearrangement of Agricultural and Fishing Villages Act for the following reasons.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant notification”) D.

The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant notification, but the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the said appeal on April 12, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. The Defendant’s defense prior to the merits of the instant case is the premise for the instant permission for development activities.