1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company established for the purpose of real estate development business, etc., and on March 13, 2015, the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) to the Defendant.

(2) On the 3rd floor, 655.2 square meters above ground, and accommodation facilities consisting of reinforced concrete tanks (hereinafter “instant accommodation facilities”) on the 426-4 square meters (hereinafter “instant application site”) located within a planned control area under the Act, the agency filed an application for a building permit (hereinafter “instant application”).

As a result of deliberation by the Urban Planning Committee at the port on the cases of development activities for the purpose of creating a site for accommodation facilities by the Plaintiff, the result of deliberation by the Urban Planning Committee at port where permission for development (consultation) is not possible for the following reasons: the Sub-Determination Act - the possibility of social environmental problems in the region due to

B. On July 2, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of non-permission of the instant application on the following grounds:

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 1-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant’s procedural defect did not go through the deliberation of the Building Committee under the Building Act while rendering the instant disposition which rejected the Plaintiff’s application for the building permit. As such, there exist procedural defects in the instant disposition, which violates Article 11(4) of the Building Act. 2) The right to grant a building permit, in principle, should grant the building permit insofar as the application for the building permit does not fall under the grounds for restriction stipulated in the relevant statutes. There is no problem in the relevant statutes in constructing accommodation in the instant application site. The building that the Plaintiff intends to construct is a general accommodation, not a hybrid hotel, and another accommodation is already located around the instant application site