1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 25, 2009, the Plaintiff was designated as the project implementer of the Kim Sea Urban Planning Facility project (sports facilities: golf courses, playgrounds) (hereinafter “instant project”), which is a business that installs a public golf course 27 holes, golf practice range, playground, etc., on the 574 Gi-ri, Jin-ri, Jin-si, Kimhae-si (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On May 28, 2010, the Defendant publicly announced the authorization of the implementation plan for the golf course (the project period: the period from the authorization date of the implementation plan to December 31, 2012) and the authorization of the implementation plan for the playground on June 1, 2010 (the project period to December 31, 2013 from the authorization date of the implementation plan) respectively.

C. On August 4, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for change of authorization of an implementation plan to extend the implementation period of the instant project by December 31, 2020. On September 25, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for change of designation, etc. of a project operator (hereinafter “instant application for change”), including an application filed on August 4, 2015 and an application filed on September 25, 2015, to the effect that the project operator changes the project period from an existing private corporation to the Plaintiff as a public corporation, while extending the project period by December 31, 2020.

On October 21, 2015, the Defendant rejected the application for change of the instant case on the ground that the dispute between the existing investors is underway.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry in Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. In light of the whole structure and legislative intent of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act where there is no ground for disposition (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”), a disposition agency may cancel the authorization of an implementation plan or take other necessary measures pursuant to Article 133(1)15-2 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, despite the fact that the project executor could complete the project during the project period specified in the implementation plan.