1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Around 2014, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff had been ordered to restore farmland to the original state on two occasions on the ground that the owner of the land B in Jeju city, which was bordered with the land owned by the Plaintiff by the Plaintiff due to the Plaintiff’s civil petition, constructed an illegal retaining wall, etc., but the owner of the said

Nevertheless, on December 22, 2014, the Defendant committed an act of knowing that the restoration to the original state has been completed to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant act of aware”).

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. The Defendant’s lawsuit on this case’s main defense is unlawful for the following reasons.

1) The instant act is merely an act of fact that is not subject to an appeal litigation. 2) Even if the instant act of know-how is subject to an appeal litigation, there is no legal interest in seeking revocation of the instant act of know-how to the Plaintiff, and thus, standing to sue is not allowed.

B. Determination 1) Whether a certain act of an administrative agency of the relevant legal principles can be the subject of an appeal litigation cannot be determined abstractly or generally. In light of the aforementioned legal principles, it is not the subject and purport of the relevant statutes; the subject, content, form, and procedure of the act; substantial relation between the act and the disadvantage suffered by interested parties such as the other party; the principle of administration by the rule of law; and the attitude of interested parties with the administrative agency involved in the pertinent act. The act that does not cause direct legal change in the legal status of the other party or other interested parties, such as acts within the administrative agency, intermediation, solicitation, and de facto notification, is not the subject of an appeal litigation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Du43974, Mar. 12, 2015). In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the notice of this case is notified to the civil petitioner of the result of an on-site investigation after the order to reinstate the Plaintiff’s civil petition.