1. On May 19, 2015, the Defendant’s rejection of an application for the selection of a liquefied petroleum gas filling station against the Plaintiff shall be revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 6, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for the selection of a liquefied petroleum gas filling station for automobiles (hereinafter “instant application”) with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant application”). D and one parcel (hereinafter “instant application site”) designated as a development-restricted zone, adjacent to B (hereinafter “C,” the classification map for each section of Section C as “C”) and designated as a development-restricted zone.

B. On May 19, 2015, the Defendant returned the above application to the following grounds (hereinafter “instant disposition”), in light of the entire purport of the pleadings, including the instant disposition and the content of pleadings, the Defendant’s disposition: (a) specified the reasons indicated in the instant disposition, and (b) considered the Defendant’s summary as the grounds for the instant disposition, including the Defendant’s summary; (c) returned the said application to the lower court.

1) The day on which the above selection application is filed is located in C, and C, in principle, may not establish a plan for allocating liquefied petroleum gas for motor vehicles to the section C located in a development-restricted zone due to the reasons such as restricting the permission to occupy and use the road to maintain the function and maintenance of the road for the purpose of opening C (hereinafter referred to as "grounds for Disposition 1") (hereinafter referred to as "grounds for Disposition 2") in principle, for the purpose of maintaining the road's construction and maintenance (hereinafter referred to as " grounds for Disposition 1") (hereinafter referred to as "grounds for Disposition 2") / [the grounds for Disposition

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Article 52(1) of the Road Act and Article 60(1) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act provide that, after completion of the construction of a road, Defendant Claim C is scheduled to be designated and publicly announced as a motorway under Article 48 of the Road Act, and that, on the other hand, exclusive of facilities installed by the State, a local government, a public institution, or a public organization, may not be connected to a motorway under Article 52(1) of the Road Act.

Moreover, C was installed as a motorway with a speed of 90km.