1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.

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

1. The facts below the basic facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7, 9, 12, and 15.

On October 17, 2005, the Plaintiff obtained permission for conversion of a mountainous district (hereinafter referred to as “the first conversion of a mountainous district”) from the head of a Si/Gun having jurisdiction over the title holder of permission with respect to the area of 8,905 square meters among the area of 73,388 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “the instant forest”) from the head of a Si/Gun, by setting a period for exclusive use as “Co., Ltd. E”, “the creation of a site for general houses and entry roads”, and the period for exclusive use as “from October 17, 2005 to October 20, 207.” The head of a Si/Gun revoked the first conversion of a mountainous district on the ground that the said exclusive use period has not been completed on December 4, 2007, on the ground that the said exclusive use period has not been completed, and notified the Plaintiff of the restoration of the instant forest by February 28, 2008.

B. In addition, the Plaintiff: (a) from the head of Si/Gun/Gu around March 2010, the Plaintiff: (b) obtained permission title holder with respect to the size of 3,976 square meters among the instant forest land from the head of Si/Gun; (c) obtained permission for conversion of a mountainous district (hereinafter “second permission for conversion of a mountainous district”) by setting the exclusive purpose as “F Co., Ltd.; (d) housing site and road site”; and (e) obtained the exclusive period as “from March 2010 to December 30, 2011”; and (e) delegated the same to H who operates G around December 201, the Plaintiff converted a mountainous district to the head of Si/Gun with the title holder who obtained permission for conversion of a mountainous district from March 31, 2010 to “from November 30, 2013.”

2. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment

A. (1) On October 2005, the Plaintiff asserted that Defendant B, who operates K to build housing in the instant forest, delegated all necessary legal affairs including the acquisition and renewal of the first permission for the conversion of the mountainous district, to Defendant B until the completion of the said housing (this refers to the Plaintiff’s “the first contract,” and accordingly, this refers to the Plaintiff’s “the first contract”). Defendant B obtained the first permission for the conversion of the mountainous district.