The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

judgment of the first instance.

The reasons why our court should explain about this case are as stated in Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, inasmuch as the reasons why we should explain about this case are deducted from adding the following Paragraph (2).

[Plaintiff] The Plaintiff’s forest land in Gangseo-si (hereinafter “instant forest land”) also in the party branch.

() The Defendant’s instant disposition rejecting a building report on a detached house with 1,015 square meters on the ground of 18,744 square meters and the disadvantage the Plaintiff entered is much more than the public interest to be achieved thereby, and thus, the instant disposition was unlawful by abusing discretion. However, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant’s additional discretion was unlawful for the Plaintiff’s future living facilities, including Gap evidence Nos. 10-1 through 4, Gap evidence No. 11-1-4, Gap evidence No. 12, Gap evidence No. 15-1 through 3, Gap evidence No. 16, 17, Gap evidence No. 18-1 through 4, and Gap evidence No. 19 through No. 21-21, which had been proven before the Plaintiff’s previous disposition, including the Plaintiff’s 18,744 square meters and the Plaintiff’s statement No. 18-1 through No. 19-21, and the Plaintiff’s additional discretion was rejected or otherwise denied.

However, when considering the overall purport of the arguments in the statements Nos. 10-1, 2, and 11-1 and 2 of Eul evidence Nos. 10-10, the forest of this case is set up as follows: the forest of this case is set up with its surrounding land; the average slope level of the site is considerably 17.13; and the road of this case is set up in a distance from the road.