1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 19, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a building report pursuant to Article 14 of the Building Act to newly construct a stable on the ground of 4,410 square meters (hereinafter “instant application site”) prior to Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si, and its location and status are the same as the attached drawing 1).

B. On November 28, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the content that, in accordance with Articles 56 and 58 (Standards, etc. for Permission for Development Acts) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) in which the instant application is filed, there are traditional temples of historical, cultural and cultural value in the vicinity of the relevant application site in accordance with the guidelines for the operation of permission for development activities, and that there is concern over the occurrence of environmental pollution, such as air water quality, etc. due to the establishment of livestock pens and the prevention of spread thereof.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute over the grounds for recognition】, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1 is located in C at a distance of about 400 to 500 meters from the non-existence of the disposition ground of this case to the south of the application site of this case. However, since the conflict between the application site of this case and C is obstructed by mountain, it cannot be viewed as the land. Since the application site of this case is far away from the access road of C, there is no possibility of damaging C's landscape or damaging environmental cultural property, etc., and the defendant enacted and operates the Ordinance on Restriction of Livestock Raising in Kimcheon-si, and the application of this case does not fall under the zone subject to restriction of livestock raising under the above Ordinance, and the plaintiff is not likely to cause environmental pollution and damage to life since it is constructed and operated with a preventive measure for reducing malodor and preventing the outflow of excreta, and there is no concern about environmental pollution and damage to life, and there is a new axis in the application site of this case.