1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 2, 2017, the Plaintiff obtained permission for solar power generation business from the Defendant with the content of operating solar power generation business in the north-gu Bri (hereinafter “Bri”) in the forest and field C (hereinafter “Bri”).

B. On August 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission to engage in development activities to install solar power generation facilities on a 4,900 square meters of C forest land 33,855 square meters (hereinafter “instant application site”).

C. On December 28, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting the Plaintiff’s application for permission for development activities on the following grounds (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

Grounds for non-permission - The application of this case shall be made in consideration of the feasibility of location, appropriateness of infrastructure, impact on the environment as well as the protection and creation of landscape, and minimization of fine view damage to the production management area.

- In the event that solar power infrastructure is entirely different from the actual conditions of the utilization of surrounding land at the center of farmland, it does not conform to the surrounding environment or landscape and thus comply with the guidelines for the operation of development permission at port (hereinafter referred to as “instant operating guidelines”) [Attachment 3].

- In accordance with Article 3(1)3 of the Operating Guidelines, it does not conflict with the location near the center of the collective land, such as land rearrangement, etc.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 7, 11, Eul's 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of this case should be revoked on the following grounds that the disposition of this case constitutes an abuse of discretion or discretion for the following reasons.

1) Even if solar power infrastructure is installed in the instant application site, given the nature of the topography, it does not directly view the village or surrounding road due to its nature, so it does not harm the surrounding environment or landscape view. 2) The Defendant shall submit to the Plaintiff a plan to prevent danger and injury.