1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 16, 2015, the Plaintiff submitted to the Defendant a written report on the crushing of aggregate to the place where the mine area B and 8 lots of land (hereinafter “instant land”) are installed. On February 5, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the acceptance of the report with the following content.

B B A

B. On February 2, 2018, in order to extend the reporting period, the Plaintiff submitted to the Defendant a report on the crushing of aggregate with respect to the instant land (hereinafter “instant report”). On March 14, 2018, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the acceptance of the said report is impossible on the ground that “The construction site for C apartment construction, which was entered as the original source in the business plan, is completed on August 10, 2016, and there is no soil for supply,” and ② the charge for compelling the performance of illegal buildings above the instant land and the fine for negligence due to the failure to report on the alteration of dust scattering business, and ③ the Plaintiff illegally occupies nearby farmland.”

C. On April 6, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a report on the selection of aggregate (hereinafter “instant report”) with the Defendant again, but on May 4, 2018, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the acceptance of the said report is impossible on the ground that “(i) the three construction sites of three companies, such as the Korea Housing Redevelopment Project Association, indicated as the original source in the business plan, have been completed, there is no intention to supply, and (ii) the enforcement fine for the illegal building on the instant land is delinquent, and (iii) the Plaintiff illegally occupies adjacent farmland.”

On May 4, 2018, the Defendant’s acceptance of the Plaintiff’s report on the crushing of aggregate as above and the Plaintiff did not have the effect of the report, and thus, on May 4, 2018, the case does not exceed six months of the suspension of business against the Plaintiff.