1. All appeals by the plaintiff (appointed party) are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the appointed parties.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is that the court added the following determination to the third following the fourth third of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the part as to whether the disposition of this case is legitimate (the determination as to preliminary claim) is legitimate (the determination as to preliminary claim) under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the case as set forth in the following paragraph (3). Thus, the court cites this case as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act

(hereinafter the meaning of the medical language used in this case is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance). 2. Additional part 3. Judgment on the assertion of defects in standing to sue

A. The plaintiff asserted by the defendant and the defendant joining the defendant is merely a third party, not the other party to the disposition of this case, and the infringement of the living environment asserted by the plaintiff is merely an infringement of indirect and abstract interests, not an infringement of the benefits protected by law. Thus, the plaintiff has no standing to seek revocation of the disposition of this case

(1) The Defendant and the Intervenor asserted the Defendant’s conjunctive claim on December 27, 2017, and there is room to regard this part of the instant preliminary claim as the primary claim, namely, the primary safety defense on the primary claim of this case. However, this part of the instant preliminary claim is related to standing to sue, which is common to the litigation seeking revocation and invalidation, and the instant preliminary claim may be problematic as well as the instant preliminary claim. The Defendant and the Intervenor did not have any express assertion on the exclusion of the Defendant and the Intervenor. Thus, this part of the preliminary claim, including the instant preliminary claim, should be seen as to the legitimacy of this part of the instant preliminary claim.

Judgment

Even if a third party is not the direct counter-party to an administrative disposition, if the legal interest protected by the administrative disposition is infringed, the propriety of the administrative disposition shall be decided by filing an administrative litigation seeking the cancellation or invalidity confirmation of the disposition.