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. The Plaintiff’s status and the content of the previous disposition 1) The Plaintiff’s public disposal of livestock excreta from March 31, 2012 to April 2, 201, as a private investment project entity, (i) the Plaintiff’s public disposal of livestock excreta (hereinafter

(2) On June 29, 2014, the Defendant measured malodor with respect to the instant treatment facilities, and as a result of the inspection, made recommendations to the Plaintiff on July 1, 2014 on the result of the inspection that the instant treatment facilities exceeded permissible emission levels.

In other words, on August 3, 2014, the Defendant confirmed that the instant treatment facilities are generating malodor in excess of permissible emission levels, and issued an order to take measures against the Plaintiff on September 1, 2014.

On January 12, 2015, the Defendant still confirmed that the instant treatment facility exceeds the permissible emission level, and issued an order to take measures on January 21, 2015 and June 18, 2015.

As a result of the inspection of the details of the administrative disposition for the measurement of malodor on June 29, 2014, the Governor of Jeollabuk-do, which was inappropriate on July 1, 2014 as of July 1, 2014, issued an order to take measures on September 1, 2014 as inappropriate on August 3, 2014, issued under the order to take measures on September 1, 32015, issued on January 21, 2015, on August 28, 2015, pursuant to Article 8-2 (1) of the Malodor Prevention Act, “The instant treatment facilities were filed at least 35 times from the summer to June 2015, on the ground that the previous malodor control facilities were designated and publicly announced as malodor control facilities (hereinafter referred to as “waste-emitting facilities subject to the disposition of malodor”).

(4) On June 21, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a strategic civil petition against the Defendant with the Jeonju District Court 2016Guhap1407, which was ① a 35-time civil petition filed by a rental business operator of a specific apartment to win a lawsuit claiming damages equivalent to the decline in the apartment market due to malodor. ② In the process of investigating whether the malodor permissible emission levels exceed the permissible emission levels, the Plaintiff did not comply with lawful procedures according to the fair malodor test standards.