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 1, 199, the Plaintiff purchased 826/14,380 shares of C Forest 14,380 square meters (hereinafter “the forest before the instant subdivision”) from B on September 1, 199, and completed the share transfer registration on December 15, 2004.

B. On September 8, 199, the forest land before the instant subdivision was divided into 661 square meters of C forest land, 826 square meters of D forest land, 12,893 square meters of E forest land, and the registration of subdivision was completed on September 6, 200.

- Measures to remove illegal mountainous district facilities and restore mountainous district -

(a) Measures for planting big trees at intervals of 2 meters by laying earth and sand, where stone products in Pocheon-si C, D, and E are able to grow up and gather trees;

(b) Measures for planting big trees at intervals of 2 meters after removing illegal facilities which purify the water in Pocheon-si;

C. On April 6, 2015, the Defendant issued an order to remove facilities and restore mountainous districts (hereinafter “instant disposition”) with the following content pursuant to Article 44(1) of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act on the ground that the Plaintiff constructed roads and constructed facilities, etc. in part of the forest land before the instant subdivision without permission for mountainous district conversion.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without any dispute, Gap's 2, 4, 5, Eul's 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that a road is constructed on the forest before subdivision of the instant case without obtaining permission from the Defendant and the construction of facilities, etc. is recognized.

However, when the Plaintiff’s use of the land owned by F as factory entry for the use of it was no longer possible to use the said land against F, the Plaintiff’s purchase of some shares in the forest before partition from B, even though the Plaintiff, B, and F, a co-owner, decided to partition co-owned forest land according to their respective shares, thereby preventing F from filing an application for permission for conversion of mountainous district because it did not comply therewith, and the Plaintiff F, etc.