Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim for revocation of the 1-year disposition of restriction on the registration of rice direct payments is dismissed.

The plaintiff's remainder.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. In 209 and 2010, the Plaintiff registered the Defendant as a person eligible for direct payments compensating for rice income, etc. (hereinafter “rice subsidies”) with respect to farmland of 129,503 square meters in total located in Young-gun, Young-gu, 200, and received the total amount of rice subsidies from the Defendant.

B. On November 18, 2014, the Defendant: (a) received subsidies for rice in a manner as indicated in the column for disposal as follows; (b) on the ground that the Plaintiff constituted “cases of registration or receipt by false or other unlawful means” under Article 13(1)1 of the former Rice Income Preservation Act (amended by Act No. 11230; hereinafter “former Rice Income Preservation Act”); (c) on the ground that the Plaintiff constituted “cases of registration or receipt by false or other unlawful means”; and (d) the Plaintiff did not receive subsidies for rice 209,00,603,609, paid in 2010 for the year 200 and 2007 for the purpose of recovering the period of prescription (hereinafter “instant disposition”); and (e) the same did not apply to the amount of subsidies for rice 200,609,609, 209, 2007.

In addition, the three-year measure was taken to restrict the registration of rice subsidies.

The grounds for disposition No. 1 B 2007 2008 Plaintiff was 2 C ginseng dry field that the Plaintiff did not actually cultivate, which was 3D 2009 2010 roads that were not farmland eligible for rice direct payments, and was not farmland eligible for rice direct payments.

C. On January 19, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Jeonnam-do Administrative Appeals Commission. On April 27, 2015, the administrative appeals commission dismissed the claim to revoke the instant restitution disposition and mitigated the registration restriction for one year.

According to the above decision of the administrative appeals commission, the Defendant reduced the period of restriction on the registration of the Plaintiff’s rice direct payments for one year.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 to 3, .