1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. In around January 2006, the Plaintiff and B obtained the permission period for conversion of mountainous districts from the Defendant to December 31, 201, with respect to 21,110 square meters (hereinafter “instant permission site”) among the aggregate of 28,265 square meters of 28,265 square meters of Cheongyang-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do and D forest land (hereinafter “instant permission area”), from the Defendant, for the purpose of exclusive use, from January 2007 to December 31, 201.

B. On May 14, 2012, the Plaintiff solely obtained permission from the Defendant to the Plaintiff. As to the instant permitted land, the Plaintiff paid KRW 565,90,000 deposit money to the Defendant in lieu of an insurance contract certificate concluded with E, after obtaining permission to change a mountainous district use with respect to the permission period until December 31, 2016 (the portion of KRW 17,518 square meters of C forest land, among the instant permitted land, constitutes permission for temporary use of a mountainous district, but the remainder of KRW 3,592 square meters is deemed permission for a mountainous district use; hereinafter referred to as “instant permission”).

C. On November 28, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission to change a mountainous district conversion with the content that the permitted site for the permission of the instant mountainous district conversion is extended to December 31, 2017 by 24,068 square meters among 26,083 square meters of the land in the instant permission site and 128,296 square meters of forest land among 26,083 square meters and 4,129 square meters in total, 28,197 square meters, and the period of permission.

On December 16, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the submission of a restoration plan by December 21, 2016 pursuant to Article 40(1) of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act and Article 48 subparag. 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act, since the instant mountainous district conversion is expected to expire on December 31, 2016.

E. On December 30, 2016, the Defendant applied for permission to change the Plaintiff’s mountainous district conversion on the ground that “the Plaintiff’s application does not meet the requirements for permission under Article 15-2(3) of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act and Article 18-2(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and the amount of waste rocks is excessive compared to the quantity of minerals to be recovered on the application and thus, is not appropriate for the business plan, and is likely to damage natural scenery due to unnecessary development.”