1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The instant forest was a general property under the Public Property and Commodity Management Act (hereinafter “Public Property Act”) in 158,228 square meters of land B in Mara-si, the ownership of which is Jeoncheon-do, Jeonnam-do (hereinafter “the instant forest”). The use was changed to administrative property on December 31, 2014.

B. Around December 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement with the Defendant on the purpose of lending 49,000 square meters of the instant forest land with respect to the use of ornamental trees cultivation and loan period from December 10, 201 to December 9, 2015.

C. On December 2015, the Plaintiff applied for the renewal of the lease period pursuant to Article 31 of the Public Property Act and concluded a loan agreement with the Defendant for the purpose of lending 80,000 square meters of the instant forest among the instant forest (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) from December 10, 2015 to December 9, 2020.

On August 31, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the instant loan agreement was terminated pursuant to Article 35 of the Public Property Act on the ground that the Plaintiff changed the original state of the public property leased to the Plaintiff without the consent of the head of the local government.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 4 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The details of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes are as shown in attached statutes;

3. Ex officio determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

(a) No administrative property under the Public Property Act shall be loaned, sold, exchanged, conceded, trusted, paid in kind, or made an object of investment, nor shall a private right thereon be established;

(Article 19(1) of the Public Property Act. The head of a local government may permit administrative property to be used or profit from such property to the extent that it does not interfere with its purpose or use.

(Article 20(1) of the Public Property Act. Such a provision system is based on the premise that administrative property can not be a subject of private transactions as a melting product, and accordingly, the competent authority is an administrative property.