1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff is the owner of B 1,570 square meters in Namyang-si, Namyang-si (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On December 3, 2019, the Defendant issued a prior notice of an order to dispose of farmland under Article 11(1) of the former Farmland Act (amended by Act No. 17091, Mar. 24, 2020; hereinafter the same) to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff did not use the instant land for his own agricultural management without good cause and received a notification of obligation to dispose of farmland under Article 10(2) of the former Farmland Act (amended by Act No. 17091, Mar. 24, 2020; hereinafter the same) but did not dispose of the instant land within the period of obligation to dispose of it or use it for his own agricultural management without good cause, which would be expected to issue

(See the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes). [Attachment ] Unsatisfy, entry in Gap's 1, 2, and Eul's 1, 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff is seeking the confirmation of invalidity and the preliminary revocation on the ground that the prior notice of this case is illegal.

On this issue, the defendant asserted that the prior notice of this case against the plaintiff cannot be viewed as an administrative disposition, and the plaintiff's lawsuit is unlawful.

(b) The term "administrative disposition", which is an object of an appeal litigation, means an act in the public law of an administrative agency, which causes direct change in the legal status of the other party or other persons concerned, such as ordering the establishment of rights or the burden of obligations, or giving rise to other legal effects, in regard to a specific matter, and an act inside the administrative agency, which does not directly change the legal status of the other party or other persons concerned, such as acts, intermediation, solicitation, de

(See Supreme Court Decision 2016Du41729 Decided February 14, 2019, etc.). C.

However, the prior notification of this case is based on the contents of the farmland law of the defendant against the plaintiff.