1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 13, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for permission for mountainous district conversion with the Defendant to create 23,090 square meters of 47,703 square meters of Magro-ri 116 forest land, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si (hereinafter “instant land”) as construction materials site, etc.

B. On September 5, 2012, the Defendant issued a disposition to convert the use of permission to the Plaintiff from September 5, 2012 to September 4, 2014, setting the permission period as construction materials, camping site, ancillary facilities (office, workplace), and entry roads (hereinafter “instant permission”).

C. On August 26, 2014, the Defendant extended the instant permission period to the Plaintiff on September 2, 2015, and extended the period to September 2, 2015 again on September 7, 2015 by September 2, 2016.

The Plaintiff: (a) caused the Geum River System Holdings to load construction materials on the ground of the instant land; (b) constructed a building; and (c) used it as a repair store.

Accordingly, on July 12, 2016, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to “the restoration to its original state, as it is currently in use (operation) as a repair store different from the purpose before the completion inspection of the restoration work,” and issued an order to suspend and remove the objective project to the same effect as in July 19, 2016.”

E. On August 25, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for permission to change the instant permission (hereinafter “instant application for change”) with the Defendant for exclusive purpose as “construction materials, open storages, ancillary facilities (wares), and site creation” (hereinafter “instant application for change”).

F. On August 29, 2016, the Defendant held a hearing to revoke the instant permission to the Plaintiff, and on October 7, 2016, the Plaintiff would complete the intended project within three months to the Defendant.

G. On October 27, 2016, the Defendant reserved the revocation of the instant permission by notifying the Plaintiff that “if the instant permission is not completed by January 7, 2017, the restoration to original state and the purpose of business is not completed, the revocation of the instant permission is to be revoked.”

H. On January 10, 2017, the Defendant intended business to the Plaintiff.