1. The Defendant’s disposition of non-permission to operate the electricity business to the Plaintiffs on September 19, 2018 is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of disposition;

A. On June 2018, the Plaintiffs filed an application with the Defendant for an electricity business license to install solar power infrastructure as follows:

(hereinafter “each of the instant applications”). (hereinafter “each of the instant applications”) A B CDD E F G G HJ P UV Y AB ABD L L L L L L M M M M NA M NA M N M N M NA L L L L L L L L L L L L L L n N M NA

B. On August 19, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-permission for the electrical business on the following grounds to the Plaintiffs:

1. Grounds for disposition: Article 7(5)2 of the Electric Utility Act

2. Grounds for disposition ① The criteria for the examination of permission under Article 7 (3) 1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Electric Utility Act provides that “the level of accommodation of an area prearranged for the construction of electric facilities shall be high,” so many residents of the AE village, which is the relevant site, require non-permission regarding an application for permission for the electric utility business, such as setting up solar power facilities against the surrounding environment and landscape, and filing collective complaints because solar power facilities do not harmonize with the surrounding environment and landscape, and thus, the residents’ acceptance level is low (Article 1 disposition ground). (2) Article 7 (3) 3 of the Enforcement Rule of the Electric Utility Act provides that “the electric power plant shall complete the construction and operate the electric power generation business on a timely and stable basis,” but Article 7 (3) 3 of the Enforcement Rule of the Electric Utility Act provides that “the construction plan shall be reported in order for the electric power plant to be completed on a timely basis, and the relevant site shall be prior to permission for development activities under the National Land Planning Act, and thus, it cannot be clearly obtain permission for installation of structures, etc.

2. Whether each disposition of this case is legitimate;

A. The grounds for the first and second dispositions by the Plaintiff do not meet all the requirements for the permission of the electricity business.

(b).