1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 28, 2017, the Plaintiff proposed the Defendant to designate a commercial rental housing supply promotion district (hereinafter referred to as “promotion district”) that constructs 1,105 rental housing units with 65,245 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant site”) on the Daegu Suwon-gu Suwon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as “instant site”).

B. Around that time, the Defendant requested consultation on the proposal of this case with the head of the Army D unit (hereinafter “Jurisdictional Department”) and related departments, including urban planning department, to determine whether to accept the proposal of this case.

C. On January 25, 2018, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the result of consultation with the relevant department, and requested that the Plaintiff submit all relevant documents, such as “ Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment” and “damaged Area Restoration Plan,” which are necessary to cancel the development restriction zone by December 31, 2017, and the Plaintiff’s proposal is not required to review whether to accept it,” and that the submission of its opinion thereon by February 1, 2018.

On February 1, 2018, the Plaintiff responded to the above request that the Defendant submit a plan to be attached after the prior examination for commercial rental housing projects and the formulation of a draft deliberation following the deliberation on the formulation of a plan for the restoration of damaged areas, including strategic environmental impact assessment (the preparation for evaluation of strategic environmental impact assessment shall be attached to the application form for the designation of the promotion district), which was not attached to the Defendant. The Plaintiff requested that the submission deadline for the plan be extended by February 14, 2018, to examine whether the requirements for cancellation of development restriction zones are met through questioning by the Minister

E. On February 23, 2018, the Defendant’s request for the submission of the Plaintiff’s existing opinion was delayed at the Plaintiff’s request for the extension of the deadline, and the date of response of the competent agency’s opinion regarding the construction of commercial rental housing in the military protection zone was extended on March 9, 2018.