1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a juristic person established for the purpose of raising livestock, etc., and established and operated swine farmers at C farms located in Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun (hereinafter “instant pigs”).

B. In accordance with Article 11(1) of the Act on the Management and Use of Livestock Excreta on January 4, 2012, the Plaintiff issued a permit to install a waste-generating facility and disposal facility equivalent to a total of 1,539m2 within a C farm, which is re-issued by the Defendant, for the installation of a waste-generating facility and disposal facility equivalent to a total of 1,539m2 within the C farm, and raises approximately 1,90

C. On October 15, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke permission for livestock excreta discharge facilities pursuant to Article 18 of the Livestock Excreta Act to the Plaintiff on the grounds as follows:

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The date and time of violation: Violation: (a) a facility that does not convert livestock excreta flowing into a disposal facility on September 29, 2014; or on August 11, 2015 (violation of Article 17(1)2 of the Livestock Excreta Act): A facility that discharges livestock excreta flowing into a disposal facility without converting it into resources (violation of Article 17(1)2 of the Livestock Excreta Act): the period for disposal of domestic excreta discharge facilities of Gohap-gun, Gohap-gun, and two parcels of land agricultural companies: (b) a disposal period of domestic excreta discharge facilities: October 12, 2015; (c) a period for suspension of livestock breeding from May 11, 2016 to May 12, 2016; (d) there is no dispute over the suspension of livestock breeding [based on the grounds of recognition]; subparagraph 1; and the purport of the entire pleadings, including the serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply);

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant: (a) discharged livestock excreta in an intermediate state without converting livestock excreta into resources; and (b) disposed of the instant disposition. However, even if water supply facilities installed in the instant money shed face with pigs and were destroyed and damaged; and (c) in the process, it is unreasonable to conclude the instant disposition as an act of discharging livestock excreta with excreta, even if water was mixed into excreta. Therefore, it is unlawful for the instant disposition to deem it as an act of discharging livestock excreta. 2) Even if livestock excreta was discharged due to the Plaintiff’s negligence, it is unlawful.