1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.

2. The time of appeal.

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff, around February 2014, between the Defendant and the Defendant, entered into a land reclamation contract (hereinafter “instant land reclamation contract”) with the content that: (a) the Defendant provided the Plaintiff with a plot of land (total size of 45,115 square meters; hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) on 19 parcel of land, including the size of 4,086 square meters, owned by the Defendant, for the purpose of landfill; (b) the Plaintiff paid the Defendant a landfill fee to the Defendant; and (c) the period of reclamation was from February 26, 2014 to October 25, 2014 (hereinafter “instant land reclamation contract”).

On the same day, the Plaintiff entered into two contracts with C and D (representative C) with the same content as the instant land reclamation contract with respect to land owned by C and D (a total of 71,163 square meters, including land size of 354 square meters in Yongsan-gu E).

On April 4, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for permission for development activities with the purpose of development activities under the name of the Defendant and C in order to obtain permission for development activities for reclamation activities according to the instant land reclamation agreement.

(hereinafter referred to as the “application for permission for development activities of this case.” The project plan attached to the application for permission for development activities of this case includes the following: “Installation of a reinforced retaining wall to prevent the inundation of each land of this case, and the mixture of inorganic sludge and high-quality soil sand generated from the aggregate production process, and the mixture of them is filled up by reclaiming the mixed soil on the surface of the flood-related low-water, retaining wall, and drainage channel.”

On May 14, 2014, the Defendant asked the question as to whether it is possible to improve the farmland in the event of banking by mixing the inorganic sludge with the general soil company.

On August 6, 2014, it is not appropriate to Article 3-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Farmland Act and Article 4-2 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act to utilize the inorganic sludge, a construction waste, as a fill-up system in which there are no matters for the permission for farmland improvement and the permission for farmland diversion (consultations), and for the farmland use (such as livestock penss, greenhouses, etc.) for which the report has been accepted.