1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 24-7 Forest land and 2,972 square meters (hereinafter “instant forest”).

On April 27, 2016, Cheongju Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Cheongju right”) entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to purchase the forest land of this case with the price of KRW 10 billion and obtained approval from the Plaintiff on the same day. On April 28, 2016, the Defendant filed an application for permission for development activities (land form and quality alteration) with the Defendant to newly construct a tenement house (three Dong and fourth underground floors) in the instant forest (three Dong and fourth underground floors) on the same day.

B. On November 24, 2016, the Defendant rejected from the Seocho-gu Urban Planning Committee for the following reasons, and rendered a disposition of land alteration non-permission for development activities (land form and quality alteration).

(2) Article 11(3) of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Ordinance on Urban Planning prohibits re-determination as the same agenda within five years, and thus, even if the Plaintiff applies for permission to engage in development activities for the forest of this case, it shall be returned to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff, who is not the original subject of disposition, has no legal interest in dispute over the disposition of this case. However, according to Article 11(3) of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Ordinance on Urban Planning, the agenda rejected by the Seocho-gu

The forest of this case exceeds the gradient standards for permission for development activities under subparagraph 1 (a) (iii) (b) of attached Table 1 of the Urban Planning Ordinance of Seoul Metropolitan Government (standard: 21 degrees, and the forest of this case: 21Do41 minutes)

B. The forest of this case is a land, the preservation of which was recommended at the time of the cancellation of the cultural heritage protection zone on September 2001, and is worthy of preservation as it is necessary to preserve trees for the protection of cultural heritage in the surrounding area.

Grade 1 of the Bato Evaluation by type and Grade 2 of the Bato Evaluation by each Ba to be preserved is an area requiring conservation unless there is a special reason not to do so.

A plan, etc. to use the current roads as access roads to the forest of this case.