1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 20, 2017, the Plaintiffs filed an application for permission for construction, including an application for permission for development, with a view to newly constructing a livestock raising facility with a building area of 12,309.48 square meters on the ground of Taean-gun and three lots (20,543 square meters in total site area; hereinafter “instant application site”) outside Taean-gun, and filed an application with the Defendant on November 20, 2017 (hereinafter “the instant livestock shed”).

(hereinafter “instant application”). (b)

On December 28, 2017, the Defendant rejected the instant application from the Plaintiffs on the following grounds:

(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case". The application area is formed into farmland (in the vicinity of the area where arable land has been completed with farmland) and drainage, and the area where it is not in harmony with the actual conditions of land use in the surrounding area and its surrounding environment or landscape due to the collective farmland formed for arable farming in the form of land utilization, such as the area where arable land has been located and is located for agricultural purposes, etc., the area where arable land is not in harmony with the actual conditions of land use in the surrounding area and the surrounding environment or landscape, shall be formed into farmland (in the vicinity of the area where arable land has been completed on July 19, 2005, and the surrounding area where agricultural production infrastructure has been installed, and it is necessary to preserve it as excellent farmland with the collectively formed farmland, such as the area where arable land has been used for agricultural purposes, and the surrounding environment or landscape has not been in harmony with the actual conditions of land use in the surrounding area and the surrounding environment or landscape [each entry in the evidence No. 1, 2, and 3-1]

2. Summary of the plaintiffs' assertion

A. (1) The application of this case relating to the illegality of the disposition reason, the necessity of conservation as the superior farmland, is low in the need of conservation as the specific use area belongs to the production management area stipulated in the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, and the establishment of guidance is not restricted, compared to the surrounding areas.

(2) A large number of livestock pens and solar power generation facilities are already constructed in the vicinity of the instant application site with respect to the lighting of the surrounding environment or landscape. As such, the instant livestock shed.