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 May 23, 2018, the Plaintiff obtained a license for the electric generation business with the content of operating the solar power generation business with the following contents in the Do governor of Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, and B (B lots).

The period of preparation for the project: the facility capacity (36 months from the date of permission) from May 23, 2018 to May 22, 2021: 1,99W, supply voltage: 22,90V, radio frequency: 60 Hz.

B. On July 17, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission for development activities (hereinafter “instant application”) with the content of changing the form of land of 80 square meters (hereinafter “instant application site”) among 408 square meters of 1,296 square meters of 26,761 square meters of 325,318 square meters of 26,761 square meters of Da-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul, Seoul, for the purpose of installing solar power facilities, and of installing roads on 26,965 square meters of 284 square meters of Do-gu (hereinafter “instant project”).

C. On May 8, 2019, the 5th Urban Planning Committee, which was held by the Defendant on May 8, 2019, rejected the instant application on the ground that “The 5th Urban Planning Committee, as a result of its deliberation on the instant application, was based on the following grounds: “The forest is likely to be located in the ridge, in view of the conditions of the site, and is anticipated to be vulnerable to accidents in the event of an excessive amnesty plan,” and the Defendant rejected the instant application on the ground of the result of the foregoing deliberation

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). D.

On July 29, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Chungcheong-do Administrative Appeals Commission. However, the Chungcheongnam-do Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on July 29, 2019.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In light of the following purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the instant disposition was unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretion.

The defendant presented specific grounds or materials for the determination of the instant disposition, etc., and rejected specific permission.