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 September 3, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for permission for conversion of a mountainous district and permission for development of a building (hereinafter “instant application”) with respect to 1,196 square meters among 6,839 square meters (attached Form 1 drawings 4; hereinafter “instant application site”) for the following new construction of a building:

The total floor area of 1,196 square meters: The total floor area of 444.99 square meters: 444.99 square meters: The main purpose: The main purpose: The matters of collective treatment of Class II neighborhood living facilities (manufacturing facilities): Permission for development and permission for mountainous district conversion.

B. On January 15, 2015, the Defendant rejected the instant application from the Plaintiff on the following grounds:

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”). - The instant application is located within the area in need of planned and systematic management (i) as a “plan control area” intended for limited use and development, taking into account the area anticipated to be integrated into an urban area or the natural environment that is anticipated to be integrated into an urban area, (ii) the land category is not a road or a road that may actually pass through (ii) the access road is not a road that the land category is not a road or a road that may actually pass (ii) the access road is not a road that the land category is inappropriate (b) the construction plan is likely to damage natural landscape (iii) and is located within 50 meters from the C University (living) where the application is filed, and is located within a distance of 50 meters

There is a person (No.S.) and - At the location of 30-50 meters from the border highway, and at the location of 30-50 meters from the site of application, the construction of a manufacturing facility is likely to be scenicly under the location that can be seen directly from the expressway if the manufacturing facility is newly constructed by cutting the site (no.

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking the revocation of the instant disposition, but the Gyeongbuk-do Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on April 29, 2015.

【Based on Recognition, Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and Evidence Nos. 1 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the whole purport of the pleading.