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 June 2013, the Plaintiff is a person who newly constructed a general steel-frame building (hereinafter “instant building”) with a building area of 198 square meters, total floor area of 320.6 square meters, height of 7.2 meters above the ground level of 7.2 meters on the ground of explosives-related protection zones under the Protection of Military Bases and Installations Act (hereinafter “Military Bases Act”), and the second class neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On March 26, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a report on the extension of the instant building (hereinafter “instant report”) with respect to the Defendant on the same use as on the instant land, with the purport of constructing a general steel-frame building with a height of 84 square meters and a height of 8.6 meters.

C. On April 27, 2018, the Defendant requested consultation with the head of the 10th Aeronautical Flight Authority of the Air Force on the instant report. On April 27, 2018, the head of the 10th Aeronautical Flight Authority of the Air Force sent a reply to the Defendant on the ground that the extension of the instant building does not fall under cases where consent should be required by the relevant statutes, and that the reckless extension may interfere with the preservation of the functions of military installations and military activities and military operations (the assessment that it is inappropriate in terms of explosives safety distance and noise and environment). On May 15, 2018, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the rejection of the instant report on the same ground as the reasons for the said refusal.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 4, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. On the grounds delineated below, the instant disposition is unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretion, and thus should be revoked.

1) The former Enforcement Rule of the Protection of Military Bases and Installations Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of National Defense No. 884, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter “Enforcement Rule of the former Military Bases Act”) enforced at the time of the construction of the instant building.

According to Article 8, total floor area.