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 April 18, 201, the Plaintiff obtained a building permit from the Defendant, which was owned by the Plaintiff, and combined the land category of each of the above land into miscellaneous land on the 30th of the same month following the date when the Plaintiff was approved for use on December 27, 201, on the ground of the aggregate of 16,081 square meters for B factory site, 572 square meters for C, 2,849 square meters for D factory site, and 19,693 square meters for E preceding 19,693 square meters for E (hereinafter collectively collectively referred to as “instant land”).

B. On April 26, 2012, the Defendant imposed development charges of KRW 2,815,404,020 on the Plaintiff regarding the said vehicle site creation project (land category change).

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

(1) The Defendant, at the time of completion of the imposition of the development charges of the instant land, shall select 1,282 square meters of F station site in king City as a comparative standard site to calculate the land price at the time of completion of the imposition of the development charges of the instant land (hereinafter “the instant comparative standard site”). As a result of the investigation of the characteristics of the comparative standard site with the instant land, the land price at the time of termination of the imposition of the development charges of the instant land was calculated as 2,673,191

(2) The details of development gains (i) development gains (i) 11,261,61,616,101 (i) development gains (i) 11,261, (ii) development charges (i) 2,81,815,40,404,020 (ii) specific development charges are as follows:

On July 23, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of imposition of development charges with the Central Land Expropriation Committee, but was dismissed on December 14, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, 9 through 11, Eul evidence 1 to 13 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The instant land is subject to a building permit.