1. The Defendant’s disposition to reinstate illegal farmland against the Plaintiff on January 11, 2017 is revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is implementing the construction of soil and structures (civil engineering) among construction works within Section 3-2 of Section A (B) (hereinafter “instant project”) ordered by the Korea Rail Network Authority (hereinafter “instant construction”).

B. On January 11, 2017, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to restore the farmland to its original state by February 8, 2017, pursuant to Articles 36 and 42 of the Farmland Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff was using the farmland for the work site of the instant construction without permission to temporarily use the farmland for other purposes, as the result of the on-site investigation conducted with D’s civil petition, the owner of the land 1,107 square meters (hereinafter “the instant farmland”).

An order to reinstate illegal farmland;

1. With respect to a part of a building in violation of Article 20 of the Building Act, which did not obtain a report on construction on the instant land pursuant to Article 20 of the Building Act, it is used as a corrective order under Article 79 of the Building Act and as a work district A without obtaining permission on temporary use of farmland for other purposes. By February 8, 2017, it is time to submit a report on completion along with a photograph before and after the completion of reinstatement under Article 42 of the Farmland Act. It is time to submit a report on completion to the Plaintiff’s land in violation of Article 36 of the Farmland Act used as a work district A of the instant land in violation of Article 36 of the same Act and Article 58 of the same Act, 【The ground for recognition of the contents of restoration order’, 【Nos. 1, 9, 10, 11 and 11 of the Farmland Act, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On June 27, 2014, the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport asserted that the Plaintiff’s claim to permit the temporary use of farmland for other purposes is incorporated into a buffer green belt for the instant project.