1. On December 19, 2016, the Defendant’s disposition of non-permission to operate the electric utility to the Plaintiff is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 7, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for electric utility license with the Defendant for the installation of solar power generation facilities of 297.6kW in the power generation capacity in Scheon-si B (hereinafter “instant site”).

B. On December 19, 2016, the Defendant rendered a non-permission disposition regarding the Plaintiff’s license for the foregoing electrical business (hereinafter “instant disposition”) for the following reasons.

1) In many cases, when installing structures under Article 58(1)4 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, there are many matters that conflict with the standards for permission to engage in development activities, such as damage to natural scenery and aesthetic view, and damage caused by noise, vibration, dust, etc., and permission is restricted to prevent infertility. 2) The installation of solar power infrastructure under Article 18(1)5 and 6 of the Mountainous Districts Management Act is likely to cause a forest disaster due to the outflow of downstream soil, etc., and the diversion of mountainous district is not permitted as it is likely to cause a decrease in water resources function and harm to natural scenery.

3) Since the filing site for the same reason as above is not installed with solar power infrastructure, electricity business under Article 7(5)2 of the Electric Utility Act cannot be conducted as planned. (c) On December 29, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Standingnam-do Administrative Appeals Commission (Seoul-do Administrative Appeals Commission). However, on February 28, 2017, the Gyeongnam-do Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim for the said administrative appeal. [Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 1, 1, 1, and 1, 1, and 2, 1, 1, 1, and 1, 1,

2. The attachment to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) illegality in the application of the criteria for examining the permission of the electric utility business; (b) absence of the grounds for disposition; and (c) deviation and abuse of discretionary power; and (b) illegality.

1. In determining whether the review criteria for the license of the electricity business has been applied or not, administrative authorities shall: