1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant is the implementer of the C Project implemented on October 20, 2009 through the public inspection and announcement for the designation of the B District (hereinafter “instant project”).

The Plaintiff, who completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 3, 2009 with respect to the area of 1,481 square meters and E 1,322 square meters (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) located in the Namyang-si, Nam-si, Namyang-si, the project district of this case, was paid an agricultural compensation amount due to the project of this case through consultation with the Defendant.

B. On October 31, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff started farming after the base date for the selection of livelihood countermeasures and was determined to be disqualified for persons subject to livelihood countermeasures (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

Title: It is known that (the plaintiff) as a result of the review on the application for the notification of the result of the review of living countermeasures in the C District, the application for the release of the thickness was determined as "non-conformity with livelihood countermeasures" for the following reasons:

Disqualified reasons: A person (self-employed farmer) who purchased the relevant land on June 23, 2009 and thereafter commenced farming on the relevant land, and is not disqualified due to the commencement date of farming from the date of examination; [the criteria for the selection of a person subject to livelihood measures] is not eligible for compensation for agricultural loss by cultivating at least 1,000 square meters of farmland located in the relevant area (or the date of adjudication on expropriation) before the date of concluding a compensation contract (or the date of adjudication on expropriation) before one year from the date of public inspection of the residents; the purport of the entire pleadings;

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The defendant asserted that the disposition of this case is lawful on the grounds of the disposition and the relevant statutes. The plaintiff asserted that the disposition of this case is unlawful on the following grounds.

In June 2010, the defendant's project implementation status and compensation guide are not more than 'the project implementation status and compensation guide'.